tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-40448225616244142402017-09-24T10:37:44.032+02:00Guylain Gustave Moke BlogThis Blog covers Mr Moke&#39;s in-depth analysis of world&#39;s political, social, and economic affairs. Guylain Gustave Moke- also known: Gustave Moke, is an Investigative-Journalist, Author-Political Analyst &amp; International Affairs Expert. Former Political Editor of &#39;&#39;UMOJA&#39;&#39; - &#39;&#39;LA CLOCHE&#39;&#39; Newspapers; Former Correspondent to &#39;&#39;Le Monde&#39;&#39; &amp; &#39;&#39;Le Figaro&#39;&#39;.Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.comBlogger740125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-39542293182624937612017-04-28T15:54:00.000+02:002017-04-28T21:20:50.450+02:00SOUTH AFRICA: ANC's Conundrum<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">The ANC will hold a conference in December to pick a new party leader who will be its candidate for the 2019 elections. But there is a growing fear among party members that the party could lose power in the next election, if internal divisions, corruption continue to shape the party's future. In fact, the party slipped to 55 percent of the vote in last year's local elections, its worst ever result.<br /><br />Zuma, 75, is due to step down as head of the ANC in December, as as president ahead of 2019 general election. Zuma's corruption allegations, of being in the sway of the wealthy Gupta business family, allegedly granting them influence over government appointments and contracts and internal divisions within his government have weakened the party.<br /><br />Dissatisfaction with the government has been growing over high levels of unemployment, a lack of basic services and allegations of widespread corruption. the ANC is likely to use its impressive mandate to try to drive through its National Development Plan - rejecting nationalisation, and emphasising investment and infrastructure. The business-friendly plan has alarmed South Africa's powerful unions - some of which may soon break away to form their own party.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-P4ZtKB4q0LI/WQNGnHRGGjI/AAAAAAAADh0/JbtywUAfwDMZ9io32T7Ogjmp-YG324M_gCLcB/s1600/jacob-zuma-1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="227" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-P4ZtKB4q0LI/WQNGnHRGGjI/AAAAAAAADh0/JbtywUAfwDMZ9io32T7Ogjmp-YG324M_gCLcB/s320/jacob-zuma-1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />It might be tempting to conclude that in South Africa the more things change, the more they stay the same. But the national polls, and electoral outcomes in South Africa’s nine provinces, reveal subtler shifts and trends that cast the election in a rather different light and raise important questions about the ANC’s future as a dominant party. Would the ANC be able to deliver its promises and maintain its legitimacy? Would President Zuma and the ANC leadership be able to address the big issues that sickening South Africa today?<br /><br />The&nbsp;<span class="caps">ANC</span>&nbsp;wasn’t just elected into government in 1994. It reclaimed the freedom and self-determination of all people by means of a struggle that was long, bloody, dehumanizing, humiliating and towards the ends, fairly clever. On a continent where democracy is largely just another corrupt form of failed governance, the&nbsp;<span class="caps">ANC</span>&nbsp;is the party that won the struggle, thereby becoming the natural leader of the nation.<br /><br />But the power the&nbsp;<span class="caps">ANC</span>&nbsp;holds in its current form is neither saturated nor guaranteed. Its leadership is not carved in stone. The massive power struggles within the party are the truest form of political rivalry and need to be given more attention. The prevalent whining about the definition of a “true democracy“ and the size and relevance of the opposition also misses the point. The government is not accountable to its opposition. It is accountable to its people.<br /><br />Many things have improved in South Africa since 1994, to be sure.&nbsp; State racism has ended, and the country now boasts what many describe as the most progressive constitution in the world.&nbsp; People have rights, and there are institutions designed to protect and uphold those rights.&nbsp;Still, everyday life for most South Africans remains a struggle – a struggle that is infinitely compounded by the sense of disappointment that accompanies it, given the gap between the expectations of liberation and the state of abjection that the majority continues to inhabit.<span id="more-5355"></span><br /><br />South Africa’s unemployment rate in 1994 was 13 percent – so bad that most were convinced it could not get worse.&nbsp; Yet today it is double that, at more than 25 percent.&nbsp; Add all the people who have given up searching for work, and the figure is closer to 37 percent.&nbsp; The situation is particularly bad for young people.&nbsp; The&nbsp;<i>Economist&nbsp;</i>recently reported that “half of South Africans under 24 looking for work have none. Of those who have jobs, a third earn less than $2 a day.”<br /><br />Besides its dismal record on employment, South Africa also boasts a reputation for being one of the most unequal countries in the world.&nbsp; Not only has aggregate income inequality worsened since the end of apartheid, income inequality between racial groups has worsened as well.<br /><br />According to the 2015 census, black households earn only 16 percent of that which white households earn. About 62 percent of all black people live below the poverty line, while in the rural areas of the former homelands this figure rises to a shocking 79 percent. In 2006, 70 percent of South Africa’s land was still under the control of whites, who constitute a mere 10 percent of the population.&nbsp; The ANC’s Black Economic Empowerment programme has succeeded in minting new black millionaires (South Africa has 7,800 of them now), but cannot seem to manage the much more basic goal of eliminating poverty.<br /><br />How could things have gone so wrong?&nbsp; Much of it has to do with what happened during the negotiated transition of the 1980s and early 1990s.&nbsp; The apartheid National Party was determined to ensure that the transition would not undermine key corporate interests in South Africa, specifically finance and mining.&nbsp; They were willing to bargain away political power so long as they could retain control over the economy. &nbsp;And so they did.&nbsp; The ANC was forced to retreat from its position on nationalisation, and an IMF deal signed just before the transition deregulated the financial sector and clamped down on wage increases.&nbsp; The central bank, left in the hands of the old apartheid bosses, was insulated from democratic politics and its mandate limited to targeting inflation instead of employment or growth.<br /><br />The National Party only managed to extract these concessions because they had successfully divided the resistance movement between moderate elites, such as Thabo Mbeki, who had spent many years in exile, and the more radical activists who were at the forefront of the struggle within South Africa itself.&nbsp; The latter were largely unrepresented in the economic negotiations, while the former enjoyed a sort of royal treatment, including a now infamous series of secret meetings in the United Kingdom with major figures in mining and finance.<br /><br />Mbeki, a self-proclaimed Thatcherite, was easy to convince.&nbsp; He already believed in the basic neoliberal principles that the National Party were hoping to instantiate. For him, the route to prosperity for the new nation depended not on nationalisation and redistribution, but on “free trade” and foreign investment, which would supposedly grow the economy and trickle down to the poor.<br /><br />Still, when the ANC assumed power in 1994 it implemented a progressive policy initiative known as the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP).&nbsp; The RDP was designed to promote equitable development and poverty reduction, mostly through public investment and the mass rollout of social services to connect millions of people to housing, electricity, water, and clinics.<br /><br />Despite its successes, this policy framework was abandoned a mere two years later.&nbsp; Mbeki and then Finance Minister Trevor Manuel held clandestine discussions with World Bank advisors toward drafting a new economic policy known as GEAR (Growth, Employment, and Redistribution, even though it accomplished precious little of the latter). It was implemented in 1996 despite significant resistance from within the ranks of the unions that had given such force to the anti-apartheid struggle.&nbsp; Known by its detractors as the “1996 class project”, GEAR amounted to a sort of neoliberal shock therapy: more privatisation, lower trade barriers, and looser financial controls.<br /><br />When the ANC came to power with a landslide vote in 1994, they did so on the promises of the Freedom Charter.&nbsp; Penned in 1955, the Freedom Charter expressed South Africans’ demands for the right to work, housing, freedom of movement, and – most radically – economic justice.&nbsp; “The national wealth of our country, the heritage of South Africans, shall be restored to the people,” the Charter reads.&nbsp; “The mineral wealth beneath the soil, the Banks and monopoly industry shall be transferred to the ownership of the people as a whole, [and] all other industry and trade shall be controlled to assist the wellbeing of the people.”<br /><br />Most South Africans agree that these promises have been horribly betrayed.&nbsp; South Africa’s mineral wealth, including some of the richest seams of gold, platinum, and coal in the world, remain in the hands of corporations such as British-owned Anglo American.&nbsp; The finance sector, which has ballooned to a dangerously large 21 percent of the country’s GDP, remains mostly monopolised by four white-owned conglomerates.<br /><br />Given these contradictions, it is no wonder that South Africa is ablaze with discontent, earning it the title of “protest capital of the world”.&nbsp; It seems that every year authorities report that the number of protests has reached the highest levels since the end of apartheid.&nbsp; And, indeed, the figures are staggering: Since last year some 3,000 protests occurred over a 90 day period, involving more than a million people.&nbsp; South Africans are taking to the streets as they give up on electoral politics.&nbsp; This is particularly true for the young: Nearly 75 percent of voters aged 20-29 did not participate in the last local elections.<br /><br />The government’s response has been a mix of police repression and the continued rollout of welfare grants, which now reach more than 15 million people.&nbsp; The grants are a stop-gap solution to the failure of trickle-down economics, a way of papering over the contradictions of South African capitalism; everyone is aware that without them poverty and inequality would be so unbearable that the country’s already tenuous sense of social stability would come crashing to an end.<br /><br />So far the protests have been focused on issues like access to housing, water, electricity, and other basic services, but it won’t be long before they coalesce into something much more powerful, as they did during the last decade of apartheid.&nbsp; There are already signs that this is beginning to happen.&nbsp; The Economic Freedom Fighters, recently founded by Julius Malema, the unsavoury former leader of the ANC Youth League, is successfully mobilising discontented youth and making a strong push to nationalise the mines and the banks.&nbsp; On a more interesting front, NUMSA, the metal workers union, recently broke ranks with the ANC in an historic turn that could open the way for a labour-based opposition to the ruling party for the first time since 1994.<br /><br />It seems that the ANC’s legitimacy is beginning to unravel and consent among the governed has begun to thin.&nbsp; It is clear that since the death of Mandela in 2013, ANC, in its current form of leadership, has dramatically failed to reconnect with its voters and lost its soul: liberation of the struggle.<br /><br />In short, the situation in South Africa over the past 20 years opens up interesting questions about the meaning of democracy.&nbsp; What is democracy if it doesn’t allow people to determine their own economic destiny or benefit from the vast wealth of the commons?&nbsp; What is freedom if it serves only the capital interests of the country’s elite?&nbsp; The revolution that brought the end of apartheid has accomplished a great deal, to be sure, but it has not yet reached its goal.&nbsp; Liberation is not yet at hand.<br /><br />By &nbsp;Prof Guylain Gustave Moke<br />International Affairs Expert<br />Political Analyst/Author<br />Lecturer<br /><br />Photo Credit: AFP-Getty Image photo of ANC Leader, Jacob Zuma<br /><br /><br /></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-41565459657547173912017-04-26T14:38:00.000+02:002017-04-26T14:38:44.146+02:00BURUNDI: Two years of Political Turmoil<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">Burundi has descended into crisis in April 2015, following the announcement on Nkurunziza's controversial bid for third term. Two years after, the regime shows no signs of easing up on a crackdown that has forced hundred of thousands to flee.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">The UN estimates that at least 500 people have been killed and more than 500.000 people have been forced to flee the country since President Pierre Nkurunziza sought a third term in April 2015. Nkurinziza's re-election violated the two term limit set by the constitution and a 2006 peace deal that ended years of civil war.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">In meantime, his ruling CNND-FDD party has unleashed its feared youth wing known as the ''Imbronerakure'' ( a word derived from local language Kirundi, meaning those who see from afar), spreading around the country, raping, arresting, harassing the opposition with total impunity.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">The UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">&nbsp;underlines the responsibility of the Burundian authorities to protect the civilian population, regardless of political affiliation, and to ensure that the widespread impunity for these heinous acts is brought to an immediate end. But Nkurunziza has rejected the UN and the African Union calls. In fact, he has grown more radicalized, taking advantage of the growing divisions on the UNSC, as well as the paralysis of the African Union and internal divisions and inflated egos within the opposition to stall negotiations.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">Two years after Burundi's fraught presidential election, violence has only deepened in the country. That presidential vote took place in an environment tainted by government crackdowns and fear, and there has been an alarming upsurge in arrests, detentions and killings, with bodies found almost daily in the streets of Bujumbura, the capital.&nbsp;</span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; color: #222222; text-align: center;"><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-u0SQMv8cDzM/VkDgmBH0h4I/AAAAAAAAC-g/da-9BuFjqR4/s1600/Pierre-Nkurunziza.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="222" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-u0SQMv8cDzM/VkDgmBH0h4I/AAAAAAAAC-g/da-9BuFjqR4/s320/Pierre-Nkurunziza.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">Since then, targeted killings of key opposition figures have multiplied. Mr Zedi Feruzi, who headed the opposition Union for Peace Development Party and was an outspoken critic of Nkurunziza's third term, was killed in Bukumbura.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">The Party' spokesman, Patrice Gahungu, was shot dead on his way home in Bujumbura. The body of Charlotte Umugwaneza, an activist for the opposition Movement for Solidarity and Democracy &nbsp;(MSD), was found in the Gikoma River. Human rights activist Pierre Claver Mbonimpa, survived assassination attempt.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">Gen, Adolphe Nshimirimana, Nkurunziza's long-time ally and deputy, was killed, allegedly by other soldiers. Only two weeks later, the former Chief of staff of the army, Col. Jean Bikomagu, a Tutsi who led the government forces, known as the Armed Forces of Burundi (FAB), during the civil war, was executed in front of his house.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">The army's chief of staff and another former FAB leader, Gen, Prime Niyongabo, narrowly escaped an assassination attempt in Bujumbura.&nbsp;</span></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">Opposition figures, however, are not the only victims. Attacks on journalists have grown in the past few months. Now, as results, the majority of the opposition is outside of the country and journalists are fleeing, leaving an information vacuum that social media has tried to fill.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">In a political scene dominated by oppression, the military has also seen its share of desertions, targeted killings and rumors of rebellions. Two high-ranked officers-the deputy commander of an elite infant unit, Maj Emmanuel Ndayikeza and Lt. Col. Edouard Nshimirimana-were reported missing, along with material, including 100 army radios, strengthening rumors of rebellion.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">As violence has spiked in Burundi, international actors and the government's aid lifelines-the European Union, the African Union and the United States-have continued to push for consultations and dialogue. Simultaneously, they have issued sanctions but Nkurunziza stands strong.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">The EU first issued targeted sanctions against four individuals: three connected to the government and one who participated on the failed coup, making sure not to only target Nkurinziza's camp. Aid suspension and broader economic sanctions followed when EU-brokered dialogue failed to resolve the crisis.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">It is true that sanctions have severe effects on an already struggling population, since the EU is one of the main funder of Burundi's budget. But sanctions on targeted individuals are not strong enough to bend Nkurunziza's regime, which now relies more on Russia and China, countries which do not wish to interfere in the country's political turmoil.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">The AU has also decided to increase the number of human rights observers in Burundi. Most consequentially, the AU's Peace and &nbsp;Security Council communiqué raised the possibility of deploying the EASF to prevent further violence. At the end, the AU backtracked after Nkurunziza's threats. Now t</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">he AU's Peace and Security Council should revisit the decision of deploying the EASF to end the political turmoil.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">For one, it would be the first deployment of one of the five regional African Standby Forces (ASF), and as such, would be an important test for the AU's African Peace and Security Architecture. The AU currently is undertaking its first filed exercise on a continental level, known as AMANI Africa, to test the operational readiness of the ASF, with more than 5,000 troops in South Africa.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">An EASF deployment would be a complete example of the AU's normative shift from non-intervention to a doctrine of non-indifference, meaning that the AU has the responsibility to protect a state's population from human rights violations.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">In a region that faces several elections with president keen to stay in power in the coming years, the fate of Burundi serves as an important test. International pressure to solve the ongoing crisis is therefore crucial to avoid similar in neighboring countries. Yet it will be an uphill battle as many of Burundi's leaders appear willing to risk everything to maintain the status quo.</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;"><br /></span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">International Affairs Expert</span></div><div style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; line-height: 1.6em;">Political Analyst/Writer</span></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-85579610395683263872017-04-25T15:56:00.002+02:002017-04-25T15:56:53.363+02:00FRANCE: How to deal with Le Pen's Rise?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">&nbsp;post-political situation in France is at the origin of Marine Le Pen's right wing populism, ''Front National'', growing success because&nbsp;t</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">here is really no longer a striking difference between the policies of the traditional French parties: ''Les Republicains'' and '' Parti Socialiste''.</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Center-right and center-left-parties in France offer a variant of the same kind of politics. Center-left party does not offer an alternative to the neoliberal globalization promoted by the Center-right. The only thing the Center-left can do is to manage it a bit more humanely. This creates a consensus of the center, which leaves the people without a real choice between different alternatives.</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7wlqdMtW1x0/UdMWV6a7c0I/AAAAAAAAB70/GpJVmc8rmjQ0NsgJzD4Aw4kg8Z_vv64WgCKgB/s1600/53CF12D150D5BAE4FF61C12F47F1B7_h402_w598_m2_q90_cuYLExeWm%255B1%255D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-7wlqdMtW1x0/UdMWV6a7c0I/AAAAAAAAB70/GpJVmc8rmjQ0NsgJzD4Aw4kg8Z_vv64WgCKgB/s320/53CF12D150D5BAE4FF61C12F47F1B7_h402_w598_m2_q90_cuYLExeWm%255B1%255D.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">As a result,</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">&nbsp;the French people lose their interest in politics – that’s why there was 22% abstention on Sunday first round election and there is a growing support for Le Pen as we currently witness across France. Le Pen's ''Front National'' at least pretend to offer an alternative: She is against the establishment; she takes the demands of the people into account and claims that she is speaking on their behalf.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">When Le Pen speaks about “the people,” she refers to an entity that is restricted to a certain category of people from which immigrants are excluded. This is usually accompanied by a xenophobic discourse, which is of course very negative for democracy. But let’s not forget the possibility of a left-wing populism in which the notion of “the people” is constructed in a different way: it includes both immigrants and all the people who are working in a specific country. The adversaries of the people in this case are not the immigrants, but the big transnational corporations and all the forces of neoliberal globalization. The development of a left-wing populism is the only way to fight against the growing success of Le Pen's populism.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">In France today, Le Pen is the one who speaks and appeals to the popular sector. What we increasingly see is that ''Parti Socialiste'' ( at least under Hollande) abandons the popular classes. Hollande and the ''Parti Socialiste'' are more concerned with representing the middle classes. The result is that there are many sectors that do not feel represented. This is why people tend to be attracted by Le Pen's right-wing populism.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">In France Marine Le Pen and the Front National have increasingly added to their discourse themes which they basically stole from the discourse of the Left. The defense of the welfare state and the public sector are just two examples of issue areas that Francois Hollande and the ''Parti Socialiste'' have abandoned over the years because they have opted for the neoliberal ideology.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Marine Le Pen’s political program would be a catastrophe for France! She wants to get out of the European Union, she wants to get out of the Euro and she wants to close the French frontiers – a complete return to purely national politics. Of course this isn’t realistic! Le Pen’s program is also completely unacceptable from a moral point. It’s deeply xenophobic. For Le Pen, the Muslims are the adversaries of the French people. She presents them as a threat to the secular principles of the French Republic. The assumption is: Muslims cannot be integrated because they do not accept our values concerning the equality of gays, women etc. Of course this kind of politics is not compatible with a pluralist conception of democracy.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">In order to counter the growing success of Le Pen's right wing populism in France, we need to create a ''Left wing populism''. That</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">&nbsp;''left-wing populism'' would have to take into account the concerns of the people by proposing other solutions and by trying to find ways to fight against the neoliberal globalization. That's the reason why Macron's catch-all movement ''En Marche'', a disguised form of center-left with a mix of left wing populism, becomes the cure against Le Pen's right wing populism.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Of course, the aim is not to reject globalization – that is simply not possible – but to fight for an alternative version of it. Le Pen simply rejects globalization. She wants to come back to the traditional nation state, which is impossible today. The tricky question for the Macron's center-left- left wing populism is how to take account of the popular demands that call for an alternative to Neoliberalism and to envisage what could be a realistic alternative in the present circumstances.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Many will argue that it is a bit too easy to say that left-wing populism is the solution in the fight against right-wing populism. After all, even left-wing populism is a kind of populism. Although right wing populism is quite dangerous, it is still</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">&nbsp;a necessary dimension of democratic politics. There is a necessity to take into account the demands of the people and to create a collective will. The crucial issue is how &nbsp;“people” is constructed. This also requires us to acknowledge another dimension that I think is very important: the role of passion in politics.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The passion in politics&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">refers to everything that is related to the affective dimension that is mobilized in politics. The affective dimension is at the origin of collective forms of identification. To create a people you need to mobilize this affective dimension in order to create a collective will and to make people identify with a project. But in the post-political situation that we witness at the moment, both center-right and center-left believe that passion is something that can only be used by the Right end of the political spectrum. I think that’s a very dangerous appraisal:&nbsp;</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">If you leave the affective dimension to right-wing populists, there is no way to fight against them. Not only has the affective dimension to be acknowledged, but it also has to be recognized that this affective dimension can be shaped in a much more progressive way. The two main passions in politics are fear and hope.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Le Pen uses fear – that is why she is fighting against immigrants. And it’s important for Macron to mobilize the passion of hope: to show that there is an alternative to the current situation with the growing gap between rich and poor and the destruction of the welfare state. Le Pen is also very much aware of the importance of using this affective dimension. It is therefore crucial for Macron to acknowledge it and to intervene, to mobilize and to foster affect in order to create collective forms of identification that could deepen democracy.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">To counterattack Le Pen's populism</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">, Macron must rally the people around a project that will put forward a different kind of France. I am convinced that the lack of alternatives to the current neoliberal France is one of the reasons why there is so much rejection of traditional French parties.</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">&nbsp;</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Not so long ago, the traditional parties were something that people could identify with. But over the last ten years things have changed: we’ve seen a growing movement of '' anti-systéme''. The reason for that is clear: people today can’t identify with this neoliberal France. They experience that it does not take into account their concerns, especially when it comes to jobs. Quite the contrary: many center right-center-left policies are destroying jobs.&nbsp;</span><span style="border: 0px; font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One way to reverse this, is</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">&nbsp;to create a a new version of French project that people can identify with. French people have to know that if they don’t want an old version of France, they can always create a different one.&nbsp;</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="border: 0px; font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The lack of debate of this new version of French project is another reason why we witness a growing movement of ''anti-systéme''. </span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Such a debate would certainly contribute to fostering interest among people. The disinterest in French elections results from a feeling that nothing important is at stake here.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">This debate should not be a</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">&nbsp;question of destroying the current order and to abandon the market. The problem is that the Anglo-American model has become increasingly dominant in France/Europe. We have to recover what is at the core of the French/European identity. It is nearly a given in a social democracy with its emphasis on equality, social rights, and the welfare state. It certainly needs to be adapted to the present situation and include the demands of the social movements, without going back to the welfare state we had thirty years ago. But those values – social rights and the ways in which they can be implemented and deepened – is something really important.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">In France, some experts prefer to use the term:&nbsp;</span><span style="border: 0px; font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">“radical democracy.” In order to deepen and extend current democratic institutions, this</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">&nbsp;project of radical democracy should be opposed to the notion that we need a revolution, that liberal democracy has to be destroyed in order to construct a real democracy. Liberal-democratic institutions can be radicalized; they can be made more democratic. To work within the system is about transforming its institutions, making them much more accountable, more representative – and this is an objective towards which parties and social movements need to work together.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">This radical reformism or radical social-democratic project is certainly something that can be envisaged through an immanent critique of liberal-democratic institutions if we accept that the ethical and political principles of liberal democracy are liberty and equality for all – one can’t find more radical principles. The project of radical democracy consists in pushing our societies to really put into practice the ideals that they profess.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;">Political Analyst/Author</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;">Lecturer</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;">Photo-Credit: AFP-Getty-Images of ''Front National'' Leader Marine Le Pen</span></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-13723597456174977632017-04-24T16:20:00.000+02:002017-04-24T16:20:45.221+02:00FRANCE: Macron v Le Pen <div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">The French political landscape is heading for some dramatic changes as a newcomer Emmanuel Macron and the populist Marine Le Pen are heading for the second round of the '' France's Presidential Election'' on May 7.<br /><br />Flag waving supporters cheered French centrist Emmanuel Macron and far-right leader Marine Le Pen's accession to the second round of France's presidential elections on Sunday as downcast supporters of France's two main traditional parties quietly slipped out their near-empty headquarters.<br /><br />Now, it is up to a divided France to decide, and those divisions were on full display in the first round of voting on Sunday. The country's established partied both failed to make it into the run-off for the first time in almost 60 years, and the first time ever in the Fifth Republic. In a country that has been dominated for decades by a traditional right-left political structure, voters are very clearly ready for something new.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lmnn_9Kqidc/WP4Io-ybcPI/AAAAAAAADhk/mSEN3XbGgpQ5-GzV_2Fk1e4gXihGbbdNQCLcB/s1600/BBAeGb9.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="157" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lmnn_9Kqidc/WP4Io-ybcPI/AAAAAAAADhk/mSEN3XbGgpQ5-GzV_2Fk1e4gXihGbbdNQCLcB/s320/BBAeGb9.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><b><i>Emmanuel Macron's Rise</i></b><br /><br />The secret behind Macron's success is his movement. Emmanuel Macron has reinvented France's politics with a new concept: ''the catch-all party'' or the party that attracts from all sides, beyond social classes and, above all, beyond the classic split between right and left. The electorate of this catch-all movement/candidate is gradually being defined according to the demographics uncovered in the polls, but it seems to have crossed the Rubicon and goes beyond this left-right split.<br /><br />Since the launch in April last year of his political movement ''En Marche!!'', which means ''Forward'', Emmanuel Macron wishes to become president at age 39. Macron has potential as new standard bearer, His youth is a sensation in a country that has been governed for decades by a group of politicians who all seem to look alike, with the same faces, the same names and the same résumés. He succeeds over and over in striking the right tone. He can sound conciliatory, but also brash and demanding. But he always remains polite and never raises his voice.<br />.<br />Macron is an exceptional phenomenon in times of nationwide discord. He stands out starkly from former colleagues, who often act just as haplessly as the president. Even the once-popular former Prime Minister Manuel Valls is no longer particularly appreciated by the French and is widely seen as sullen and authoritarian. By contrast, Macron can say what he wants and people still like him. He can rave about Europe, which he views as major accomplishment, not obsolete concept. And he can praise German Chancellor Angela Merkel for her refugee policy and explain why France cannot remain the way it is: paralyzed, stuck and depressed.<br /><br />To Macron's credit, he has jolted the French awake and striven to rouse the country from its state of stupefaction. Instead of seeking to appease the public, he sees it as his mission to galvanize the French into action. Moreover, this is coupled with a tremendous sense of self-confidence that consistently shines through and makes you wonder where in the world it comes from.<br /><br />Indeed, Macron means business. He says that he wants to reinvent politics, that he wants a new deal for Europe, a new social contract for France. But he has never had to stand for election. His role models are the great socialist European politician Jacques Delors, and former French Prime Minister Michel Rocard, a pragmatic reformer. Sometimes it seems as if Macron sees France as Sleeping Beauty and himself as the Prince.<br /><br />It is balancing act. Macron, who portrays himself as ''antisystéme'' (non-conformist) and very popular among right-wing, older professional voters, has the opportunity now to expand his support base, attracting voters coming from varying perspectives, men and women from the left as well as the right. His strategy has worked: Left and Rights voters are rallying behind him &nbsp;and he has indeed great chances to win the second round by more than 60% on May 7.<br /><br /><b><i>Marine Le Pen's surge</i></b><br /><br />Today France political climate is rife with violence rooted in nationalist agendas and exploitation rooted in international ones. People's sense of belonging in France has begun to detach itself from the established parties ( Republicans and Socialists) that have been governing them, and instead they have gravitated towards nationalism and populism, offered by Marine Le Pen.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; font-size: 16px;"><br /></span>Marine Le Pen claims to be fighting against ''those at the stop''. The approach is successful because the Paris elite is indeed aloof. Up until now, the established parties preferred to simply ignore the Front National. But that is no longer an option. This increases Marine Le Pen's popularity even further.<br /><br />Marine Le Pen is in very strong position to win France's presidential election next year, because French are rejecting the old parties associated with the old policies. French no longer care how extreme Le Pen's views are. In fact, many French do now adhere to Le Pen's views on the economy, immigration, the declining living standard and the lack of real job creation.<br /><br />There are three major strands in mass attitudes which predispose French to vote for the radical right or '' Front National'': nativism – that is, a belief that holds that only indigenous inhabitants should have full civic and social rights – authoritarianism, and populism which counter-poses the ordinary people against the ‘elite’, the political class, the liberal intelligentsia. This, combined, constitutes what the cultural theorist Stuart Hall called ‘authoritarian populism.’<br /><br />According to the theory of ''Pathological normalcy'', authoritarian populism, far from being confined to the margins, is deeply embedded within the mainstream. Two factors, one can argue, have propelled it into the forefront of political consciousness. The first is the rising salience, and emotional voltage of anti-immigrant feeling, that is to say mounting antipathy, resentment and apprehension towards those – whether they be recent immigrants, asylum-seekers or established ethnic minorities – who constitute ‘the other’.<br /><br />The second is, of course, the impact of the financial crash and the economic recession. The effect of this has not been a tilt to the left. Left-wing diagnoses, at least in France, have had little purchase: there is only a muted sense that the gyrations of the financial system are in any way responsible for what went wrong. Most people, one suspects, are left baffled by talk of sub-prime mortgages, derivatives and credit default swaps. They are looking for something more tangible to blame: if not Francois Hollande then welfare recipients and, of course, immigrants.<br /><br />The implication of all this is disturbing for the ''Republican'' and the ''Socialist Party''. Research for some while has indicated that authoritarian populism in France appeals in particular to the more poorly-educated, to manual workers and to routine clerical workers: the natural constituency of the those two main parties. What we are witnessing is, in a sense, a reconstitution of a form of class politics.<br /><br /><b><i>Conclusion</i></b><br /><br />In this unprecedented situation, it would be inadvisable to look past voting patters for guidance. Traditionally, when the Front National has made it into the final round of the election, voters have tended to rally around its opponent, which appears to be happening this year as well. <br /><br />The ''Republican'' and the ''Socialist Party'' have now officially declared war on Marine Le Pen and dubbed her their most important opponent for the presidential election. Both &nbsp;the ''Republican''s candidate, Francois Fillon and the ''Socialist''s candidate, Bénoit Hamon, have not wasted time in calling theirs voters to rally behind Macron.<br /><br />If the polls are right, it seems that we are heading to a repeat of 2002 presidential election when Marine Le Pen's father and ''Front National'' founder, Jean Marie Le Pen, got through to the second round in a surprise vote but went on to lose in a humiliating landslide against right wing president Jacques Chirac.<br /><br />To avoid this ''déjá vú scenario'', Le Pen's best chance of hauling back Macron's big lead in the polls is to paint him as a part of an elite aloof from ordinary French people and their problems. Part of that strategy would be to remind voters of Macron's former role as a deal breaker in investment banking and economy minister under Hollande.<br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />International Affairs Expert<br />Political Analyst/Author<br /><br />Photo-Credit: AFP-Getty Images photo of Emmanuel Macron &amp; Marine Le Pen</div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-65039990712043951712017-04-12T13:43:00.002+02:002017-04-12T13:43:26.993+02:00IRAN: Election or Camouflage?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div class="article-intro">Ex Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has registered as candidtae in May election, despite the warning of Iran's Supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The registration for the May 19 election started on Monday and will last five days, after which entrants will be screened for their political and Islamic qualifications by a vetting body, the Guardian Council.<br /><br />Iran's Supreme leader, who has the final say in Iran's clerical establishment, warned that Ahmadinejab's candidacy could create division in the country and harm the nation. The incumbent president, Hassan Rouhani, a moderate who engineered Iran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers that secured a removal on international financial and trade sanctions against Tehran, is expected to seek-re-election but faces a stiff challenge from conservatives who oppose the deal<br /><br />Elections in Iran are not democratic and fair. The run-up is marked by haggling and the post-election period by maneuvering. Only those who unconditionally support the "Wilayat al Faqih" or Guardianship of the Jurist, are permitted to run for president.<br /><br />The office of the Wilayat al Faqih was created for Ayatollah Khomenei, who drove out the Shah, and after Khomenei's death in 1989, Khamenei became the new supreme leader. He is the arbiter of war and peace, which means that he can issue the order to build a nuclear weapon or to reconcile with the "Great Satan" the United States. Khamenei is essentially the country's supreme leader for life, and his decisions are considered irrevocable. Because of this absolute power, he is no different than the autocrats the revolutionaries once vowed to defeat.</div><div class="column-wide" id="js-article-column" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/Article"><div class="article-section clearfix"><br />On May 19, the leadership in Tehran will deceive the Iranian people. It won't be the regime's first lie, but it is characteristic of the most recent history of the Islamic Republic.The propaganda machine of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, 78, is leading them to believe that they can indeed shape their country's future. If they weren't as afraid of the regime, many Iranians would not only laugh out loud at his audacity, but would also go to the barricades against this phony democracy.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-29UOpKN8VUA/UZyuS--aK2I/AAAAAAAABxc/ylRnM3Lr85E/s1600/Grand_Ayatollah_Ali_Khamenei%252C%255B1%255D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="254" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-29UOpKN8VUA/UZyuS--aK2I/AAAAAAAABxc/ylRnM3Lr85E/s320/Grand_Ayatollah_Ali_Khamenei%252C%255B1%255D.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />But in the last years, Iran has become a republic of fear. The prisons are filled with countless activists and dissenters, and some of them may be there because they laughed too loudly at Khamenei at some point. Sometimes it doesn't take much to be arrested, interrogated and locked away. But the fear is mutual. While the people tremble at the thought of being apprehended by the regime's henchmen, the leadership is also nervous about new demands for more freedom and democracy.<br /><br />In past elections, Khamenei made the mistake, disastrous from his standpoint, of allowing candidates to run who aroused hopes of liberalization. After three decades of being ruled by the turban-wearing ayatollahs, merely the prospect of a small measure of freedom was enough to drive millions to the polls and then into the streets, when they believed that their "green movement" had been cheated of its rightful victory.<br /><br />This time Khamenei is expected to deliberately obstruct a large number of potential candidates who will show only the slightest potential of wanting to question the pure doctrine of the Islamic Republic that the revolutionary leader fiercely defends. The ayatollah is so fearful that he doesn't even permit the candidacy of former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejab. As a result, the political stage is now filled with a group of especially lackluster apparatchiks.<br /><b></b><br />Officially, the constitution does provide for democratic corrective action, a right that many Iranians desperately invoked in the past, constantly pinning their hopes on the next election, the next parliament or the next president. Eventually they also came to believe that Khamenei, who considers himself a man of the people, could not completely ignore their desire for change.<br /><br />But Khamenei clings tightly to his power and is not interested in the sort of change that has taken hold in many neighboring countries. In the 29<sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">th</span></sup>&nbsp;year of his rule, he views any change as a threat. Surrounded by enemies within his own ranks, the ayatollah sees an abyss running alongside the path of the revolution.<br /><br />The reformers are no longer likely to pose a threat. Although two candidates are considered part of the reform wing, it is questionable whether they will be able to mobilize large numbers of voters. The leader of the green movement is under house arrest, while other dissenters have fled the country or have simply given up.<br /><br />A greater threat to Khamenei comes from the nationalist wing. For populist Ahmadinejad, nationalism is more important than Islamism. In the populist form of Islam that he preaches, the position of the once untouchable Khamenei is reduced to that of representative of a useless caste of clerics. At first glance, Khamenei now seems stronger than before. The reformers are intimidated, the nationalists, populists have been thwarted, and even the pragmatists have been weakened.<br /><br />Manipulation and lies are part of the business of politics everywhere. But a system that allows no dissenting views is commonly known as a dictatorship, and an election that isn't one is called camouflage.<br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br />International Affairs Expert<br /><br />Photo-Credit: AFP: Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei</div></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-84202039389147067792017-04-11T13:55:00.000+02:002017-04-11T13:55:19.594+02:00NORTH KOREA: Pyongyang's Threats<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un's regime is busy rattling its sabers again. On Tuesday, Pyongyang warned of a nuclear attack on the Unites States at any sign of a U.S. preemptive strike as U.S. Navy strike group led by a nuclear-powered aircraft steamed towards the Western Pacific.<br /><br />The Unites States Navy strike group was diverted from planned port calls to Australia and would move towards the western Pacific Ocean near the Korean peninsula as a show of force. US officials said it would still take the strike group more than a week to arrive near the Korean peninsula.<br /><br />Tension has escalated sharply on the Korean Peninsula with talks of military action by the United States gaining traction following its strikes last week against Syria and amid concerns the reclusive North may soon conduct a sixth nuclear test. <br /><br />North Korean is emerging as one of the most pressing foreign policy facing Trump's administration. It has conducted five nuclear tests and is working to develop nuclear -tipped missile that can reach the Unites States. Trump's administration is reviewing its policy towards North Korea and has said all options are on the table, including military.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QVnMt3cYie4/UT3FLISZT2I/AAAAAAAABZk/o7I8VBsUQZQ/s1600/Kim-Jong-Un_2097246b%255B1%255D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="200" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-QVnMt3cYie4/UT3FLISZT2I/AAAAAAAABZk/o7I8VBsUQZQ/s320/Kim-Jong-Un_2097246b%255B1%255D.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />Since last year, the number of bellicose threats coming out of North Korea has increased dramatically, with repeated claims the country might conduct preemptive nuclear strikes against United States targets and invade South Korea.<br /><br />The US has responded by positioning warships, including the&nbsp;<i>USS McCain</i>, an Aegis-class guided-missile destroyer used for ballistic missile defense, and a giant sea-based radar platform around the Korean Peninsula region. Military aircraft have also been sent to the peninsula. Still, it is not believed that there is much behind the threats other than talk, particularly given the expert assessment that Pyongyang doesn't have nuclear weapons capable of reaching the US.<br /><br />Although the US appears to be taking the new rhetoric seriously, concerns do not appear to be great in Washington or elsewhere in the West that North Korea is any closer to waging any kind of real war. "Despite the harsh rhetoric we're hearing from Pyongyang, we are not seeing changes to the North Korean military posture, such as large-scale mobilizations and positioning of forces," White House said.<br /><br />The new tensions between the U.S. and North Korea, come just weeks after Pyongyang conducted its fifth nuclear test. Six-party disarmament talks with North Korea have been stalled since 2008 and experts believe the new rhetoric may increase pressure to restart negotiations.<br /><br />Fortunately, the probability of a major war remains low. One reason for optimisim is China, and another is the rationality of North Korea's leadership. Those in power in China haven't abandoned the troublemakers on their northeast border, even in the wake of past military attacks, in order to prevent the Kim regimes from collapsing. They prefer to keep the country as a buffer against the United States.<br /><br />In addition, they are also extremely concerned about a potential mass influx of refugees. But there's one thing China needs even less: open warfare. And this is also clear to North Korea's leaders. Even in times of peace, the regime's survival is dependent on trade, foreign aid, money and goods from China. The chances of winning a war without aid are precisely zero. In the past, North Korea's leaders have calculated very coolly and dared to venture only the things they believed China would accept.<br /><br />Like his father, the young Kim is well aware that the regime would not survive a real war with the United States. But this blatant threat is the product of clear calculation. It enables an otherwise weak country to appear threatening.<br /><br />Domestically, it will enable him to score points to mark the Americans as enemies and pit himself against the South Koreans. Abroad, this will perpetuate an image of North Korea remaining unpredictable, which will give the country greater room for maneuver in negotiations. And it is also entirely possible that it will undertake individual military strikes in the border region with South Korea like it did in 2010. But things won't go much further than that.<br /><br />The question remains as to what could have moved North Korea to heat up the conflict with its increasingly excessive statements. One explanation is that North Korea may wage greater provocations such as a nuclear test timed with various anniversaries, including the Supreme People's Assembly. On Tuesday, North Korea convened a Supreme People's Assembly session, one of its twice year sessions in which major appointments are announced and national policy goals are formally approved.<br /><br />But also Saturday is the 105th anniversary of the birth of Kim II Sung, the country founding father and grandfather of current ruler, Kin Jong Un. To this end, the war rhetoric would make a certain amount of sense.<br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br />International Affairs Expert<br /><br />Photo-Credit: AFP North Korea's Leader Kim Jon Un</div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-65651976316062178362017-04-10T14:06:00.000+02:002017-04-10T14:06:37.180+02:00EUROPE: ''Secularism''<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">Secularism does not imply the prohibition of individual religiosity or of public displays of faith. It merely begs us to abandon any hopes for divine intervention in Europe’s messy state of affairs.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MZ5_pBDqT9Y/UmFuh_kHbRI/AAAAAAAACZY/pd2em1-0WkU/s1600/church-and-state%5B1%5D.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MZ5_pBDqT9Y/UmFuh_kHbRI/AAAAAAAACZY/pd2em1-0WkU/s320/church-and-state%5B1%5D.jpg" width="271" /></a></div><br />Religion has always been an issue on the European continent. The emergence of Christianity in the Roman Empire laid the foundation for a sacred realm in the post-Roman world that was blessed by the Christian God rather than by the ancient deities. The new God was perceived differently in the North and the South of the continent. The Nordic tribes described their Gods with strength, the Southern tribes invoked beauty.<br /><br />The German Emperors saw themselves as rightful followers of the Roman Caesars. To legitimize their reign, they bowed before a heavenly monarch: Jesus Christ, the divine king. The Christian way of life shaped Europe and gave Europeans a common cultural heritage. But battles were also fought over the specific understanding of Christian teachings. In England and Germany, two new churches arose out of the medieval bloodshed: The Lutheran Church and the Anglican Church. The unity of the European continent in terms of religion had been broken. North and South were split. Strength against beauty.<br /><h6>Never again!</h6>Astonishingly, Christianity never vanished throughout the course of European history: Humanism, modern science, the period of Enlightenment: All these historical developments opposed Christian teachings of their time but were nonetheless shaped by religious figures, often by members of the clergy. Nicolaus Copernicus was a priest, for example. I guess this strange and strong unity helps us explain why the people of Europe never abandoned Christianity. It is also the reason why Christianity has been very staunch in its support for, or opposition to, various political movements over time.<br /><br />Take, for instance, the controversy within the Christian churches of how to deal with communism. Communist teachings embraced a lot of Christian thought. But by rooting its ideology exclusively in this world, by separating it from another realm that would be “not from this world”, communism clearly contradicted the Christian understanding of the finality of this world.<br /><br />So it is no wonder, consequently, that the presence or absence of God in the European project has always been a matter of strong and engaged debates throughout the continent – remember the controversy about the inclusion of a reference to God in the European constitution? To many, invoking God seemed anachronistic in a post-national, post-religious endeavor. Until the French Revolution, every government on earth invoked divine rights for its legitimization and sought the blessings of established religions.<br /><br />After 1789, the concept of the nation-state became dominant. Both concepts led into disaster and massive destruction. The peace treaty that was signed after the Thirty Years’ War – during which more than half of the population living on soil that belongs to Germany today were killed, and others were wounded, tortured, or raped – speaks for itself: Etsi Deus Non Daretur. The parties agreed to a peace as if God would not exist. They were tired of fighting over theological questions regarding the Last Supper of the Lord, while the whole country was starving. Nationalism played a role in both world wars. The proclamation of “never again” at the beginning of European unification was a definite break with nationalism.<br /><br />After the destruction of World War II – and this is the flip-side of the European project – there was the need for reconciliation. In the countries that had been occupied by the Nazis, some found the strength to forgive the Germans for what they had done. Forgiveness was fueled by the power and with the support of Christian faith. It is embodied in the common knowledge of the Christian tradition: Christ forgave his persecutors before he died. This ideal of forgiveness has been a role model of the postwar era. It lives on in the inscription “Father Forgive”, added behind the altar of the cathedral of Coventry(England), which had been destroyed by the German air force during World War II.<br /><br />All this suggests that secularism is not exercised coherently in Europe. Here are several observations:<br />First, religious beliefs can be a force behind the motivation to engage in politics. Some parties explicitly ground their political engagement in the teachings of Christianity – you can usually identify those parties by the “C” in their acronym -, but the influence of Christianity extends far beyond them.<br /><br />Many people who don’t identify as overtly religious find meaning in what the Christian religious tradition has to say about engaging in the affairs of the world. Parliamentarians might serve under a purely secular system. However, this is the same system that grants them the right to exercise their freedom of religion and the privilege to believe in whatever God they choose. Clearly, no one would argue that their lives aren’t influenced by their religious beliefs.<br /><br />Second, freedom of religion is not just an individual right but extends to religious communities as well. Secularism acknowledges that controversial societal questions are debated by a wide range of interest groups. Religious denominations are one example. A secular society that places obstacles before religious groups, and thus impedes their ability to contribute to societal discourses, secular pluralism ceases to function. The idea loses its credibility.<br /><br />Third, Western secularism has learnt how to deal with religion against the backdrop of the Christian Occident. Secularism and Christianity, have learnt how to live with each other: Conflicts have been fought and settled over the relationship between secular and Christian authorities, and over the hierarchy of the two.<br /><br />German law still includes the so-called “Staatskirchenrecht” that regulates the relations between church and state. Every German state maintains a concordat with the the Catholic Church and the Protestant Church. This documents the relation of the state with the church in relation to education, for example. It goes without saying that the religious map of Europe has changed over the centuries, and especially since the 1950s. A strong Muslim minority has emerged in each country of the European Union, and we have witnessed the rise of a certain sensitivity towards other, smaller religious groups.<br /><br />Finally, we acknowledge those who don’t identify with religion at all. The consequence is that the classical “Staatskirchenrecht” has to be transformed into a modern “Religionsrecht”: Instead of defining the relationship between the state and the Catholic church, we must spell out the rights and duties of religions within a secular system. But scholars hardly argue about that.<br /><br />Fourth, I argue that religious speech is linguistically different from other forms of speech. I follow the philosopher Jacques Derrida, who wrote that a couple swears lifelong devotion during a wedding, and that a politician swears solemnly when reciting the oath of office. They speak as if a third party listened and had to confirm the words that are uttered.<br /><br />Derrida makes the following point: If you vow, be it while marrying or while sworn into office, you swear. Swear morphes into an-swear, written today as answer. Our existence sometimes requires, or longs for, an aspiration or confirmation that transcends our human condition. Religion has conserved this longing for enduring testimony in its very specific language, not only in worlds but also in symbols. Many court buildings are adorned with painted sceneries of Judgment Day. The visible display of Judgment Day and of the Christian cross embodies the hope for ultimate justice, carried out on earth. The religious motive is a vehicle that links the worldly struggle to the idea of divine justice.<br /><br />Fifth, religious symbolism is a natural component of culture. Today, many different languages are spoken in the European Union, but Christian iconography harks back to a time when only the elites were capable of reading and writing. The cross, which is arguably the most visible religious sign in Europe today, is such an icon. It expresses a part of our cultural identity.<br /><h6>Christianity has ceased to be a religion</h6>On all these points, the faithful and non-believers can agree. The ground is prepared for a sixth observation:<br />Christianity has become such a big part of our perceived reality and of European civilization that it is not regarded as a religion anymore. It has become a set of symbols, a set of values, a set of stories, a set of utopias, and so forth.<br /><br />I do not mean this disrespectfully. I do not mean this in the sense of Karl Rahner, who argued in his book “Anonymous Christians” that we are all religious, since we subconsciously subscribe to a basic set of Christian principles.<br /><br />Let me give an example: During the world-famous passion play at Oberammergau in Bavaria in 2010, the director mentioned that he was less than a lousy Catholic. A discussion erupted whether a non-believer should direct the story of the passion of Christ. Surely he can: The story of Jesus’ suffering isn’t the exclusive property of the Catholic Church or of Christians. It belongs to everybody. Fragments from the Christian tradition are found in songs of the Beatles and in the writings of Albert Camus.<br /><br />What are the consequences of these observations? Today, Europe is becoming increasingly aware of the intertwined relationship of the secular state and the Christian religion. It’s no contradiction that, according to a recent survey, 70 percent of Europeans declared that they strive to live their lives according to basic Christian principles while church attendance continues to decline.<br /><br />Europe is also made aware of this particular liaison by the growth of the Muslim population. Islam is not as familiar to most of Europeans as Christianity. It carries the insignia of a religion that aren’t present anymore in the faith of our fathers: religious conviction, dogmatic beliefs, a religiously infused lifestyle, and the proclamation of some sort of divine truth. The rise of European Muslim communities is accompanied by the rise of fundamental Christian groups, who raise suspicions even within the conservative Catholic hierarchy.<br /><br />Pope John Paul II was once asked (long before he fell ill) if the churches of the reformation are indeed Christian churches. He said yes. But, he added, Pentecostals and Evangelicals are not. They shorten the Christian message and resort to simple answers that cannot be supported by the Christian faith.<br /><br />This leads us to one crucial aspect that will be predominate any further debate in the European Union about religion: The supremacy of the law over religious convictions. Interest groups of the traditional Christian churches have had to learn the art of secular discourse. Of course, the Roman Catholic Church bans abortion, but it acknowledges that secular laws might allow it. The mission of the Church isn’t to sidestep the law, it is to influence its content.<br /><h6>Secularism does not prohibit religiosity</h6>Although the Acts of the Apostels – the fifth book of the New Testament – says that one ought to be more obedient to God than to man, no Christian church would demand that their faithful brethren overthrow the secular state and its rule of law. But this is not a given in debates with Muslim communities: Islam hasn’t been subjected to the same historical processes that shaped Christian churches in Europe.<br /><br />I don’t mean to blame Muslims. The flourishing of new religions on the continent helps us see the contradictions that we have grown accustomed to. One recent bloomer: A soldier in the British Royal Navy fought for his right to practice Satanism on board of his ship. The court sided with him on the grounds of freedom of religion. This may sound strange to our (secular) ears, because linguistically we are still shaped by the Christian belief that “The Beast” must not be worshipped.<br /><br />In Germany, a new constitution might be in order within the next few years. The Constitutional Court alluded in this direction because of the further integration of Europe and the legal problems it raises under the current constitutional framework. Depending on how far integration proceeds, a new constitutions might be in order. Would it still mention God in its preamble? Would it still protect Christian holidays as holy? (Currently, the police is authorized to break up loud parties on Good Friday, since it’s protected as a day of national contemplation.)<br /><br />Will an example from the City of Oxford become the norm? It recently ruled that no Christmas trees could be erected in public places, lest non-Christians be offended. This is as silly as it sounds, and it will be a passing phenomenon. We will not follow the American model and avoid saying „Merry Christmas“ in favor of „Happy Holidays“. Why would we have to? Secularism does not imply the prohibition of individual religiosity or of public displays of faith. Secularism means being aware of the fact the achievements of Europe do not rest on divine intervention.<br /><br />Calling for help from above – instead of working towards secular and worldly solutions – is a declaration of bankruptcy of the credo Etsi Deus Non Daretur by which we have run our public affairs since 1648. The slogan “As if God did not exist” implies a simple and convincing message: We don’t have to ascertain or rule out God’s existence to be able to embrace the secular tradition.<br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br />International Affairs Expert<br /><br />Photo-Credit: AFP--</div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-78667905632997553132017-04-06T13:43:00.000+02:002017-04-06T13:43:11.115+02:00U.K.: -''Brexit''- The Breaking Point<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div class="article-intro">The Brexit referendum vote has caused the United Kingdom to drift apart, creating ever-widening rifts between rich and poor, native and immigrant, English and Scot. Starting the withdrawal process on 29 March 2017, putting the UK on course to leave by April 2019, Great Britain stands at a crossroads.<br /><br />The view of the rooftops of the British capital shows how quickly and radically the country has changed. London's silhouette is a reflection of two decades of growth, decadence and hubris.The frenzy began in the 1980s, when Great Britain was prosperous and London became a global financial center where brokers, traders and speculators were responsible for billions changing hands every day. Gone were the days of factories and trade, or so it seemed. The act of trading with money was dubbed the financial industry, and together with the real estate sector, it grew to become one of the most important industries in the kingdom, almost a new religion.<br /><br />Then the Brexit vote happened in 2016, and things have been going downhill ever since. UK unemployment rate fell to 4.7. percent in the period between November and January 2017 from 4.8. in the previous period and below market expectations of 4.8 percent. It was the lowest jobless rate since July to September 2005. Although the employment rate remained at all time high of 74,6 percent, wage growth has slowed, forecasting hard times to come.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lYFrWpNFogI/WOYpc76UffI/AAAAAAAADhI/vf5AWq1r6V43DYrExhvpk0X_6xxvxNAWACLcB/s1600/Theresa-May-and-Nicola-Sturgeon-745766.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="189" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lYFrWpNFogI/WOYpc76UffI/AAAAAAAADhI/vf5AWq1r6V43DYrExhvpk0X_6xxvxNAWACLcB/s320/Theresa-May-and-Nicola-Sturgeon-745766.jpg" width="320" /></a></div></div><div class="column-wide" id="js-article-column" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/Article"><div class="article-section clearfix"><br />In late January, the University of Bristol published the most comprehensive study to date on the state of British society. It concludes that a third of the population lives in precarious conditions. Millions of Britons don't have enough to eat and are unable to adequately heat their homes in the winter. And the situation will get even worse because social services are shrinking and real wages continue to decline.<br /><br />The country is already suffering from the consequences of the Brexit's uncertainty. The gap between rich and poor is growing, the conflicts between left and right are becoming more heated and Brexit is expected to drag down the economy, damaging confidence and investment. Friends and foes of Europe argue heatedly over whether remaining a member of the European Union or withdrawing from it is more likely to help the country.<br /><br />In 2019, the Scots are expected to hold a second &nbsp;referendum over whether they want to establish an independent country, one that would no longer have to share profits from the North Sea oil and gas fields with the English.The Scots have never been happy about their union with England, which has existed for 306 years. But the divisions have rarely been as great as they are today.&nbsp;Scots say that Scotland would be better off without England. It would be a richer country, because it would control its own oil and gas production. It would be a more peaceful country, because it would no longer be forced to tolerate nuclear warheads on its soil or participate in the wars of the English. And it would be a fair and equitable country, because it could reverse the British government's cuts to social benefits. It would be a free country filled with proud people.<br /><br />Irish republicans are voicing their concerns over leaving the European Union, as a consequence of Brexit and calling for the reunification of Ireland because departing the EU means that a new era of border controls is likely to emerge between the two countries, despite Northern Ireland voted Remain by 56 percent. Given given the history, the consistent agenda of Sinn Féin,&nbsp;Northern Ireland largest nationalist party and the Irish government's official stance of an ''open door policy'', the reunification is a matter ''when'' rather than ''if'. &nbsp;<br /><br />Britain's decision to depart the European Union has opened up a new panorama on the status of Gibraltar. Gibraltar voted Remain and wants to negotiate a ''special status'' with the European Union after Brexit, something Spain signalled it was ready to discuss without abandoning its claims for joint sovereignty over the disputed territory. According to the EU's draft joint position on Brexit talks, no agreement between the EU and the UK may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without the agreement between UK and Spain.<br /><br />There is a clear political divide in Britain, with each part fighting for its agenda: England (Outside EU), Scotland and Northern Ireland (Within EU) and Gibraltar ( confused). It becomes clear how public sentiment in parts of the kingdom is gradually slipping from moderate conservatism to bulldog patriotism and this political divide is indeed a cultural change.<br /><br />After coping with the loss of the Empire in the postwar period, Great Britain has been left with something akin to the phantom pain of one who has lost a limb. The majority of &nbsp;many&nbsp;Britons grew up in a country in which hierarchies that had developed throughout the centuries were still intact, and where life could be very comfortable for those at the top.<br /><br />But eventually the working class began to talk back, becoming rebellious.&nbsp;They believe that this change roughly coincided with Great Britain's accession to the European Community in 1973, and with a tectonic shift in Europe's political landscape. And&nbsp;they hope that departing the EU will help the Empire regain its old strength. What this means is a return to the 1950s and '60s.<br /><br />They say&nbsp;the government should crack down on illegal immigrants and criminals, and should build more prisons. They criticize the legalization of &nbsp;same-sex marriage, and want to block immigration from the new EU countries of Eastern Europe to come in United-Kingdom, by declaring ''a state of emergency and close the borders''. &nbsp;The problem is that the English aren't the only ones who own that island. There are other patriots -- the Scots, for example, many of whom no longer want to share their wealth. The worse Brexit gets, the clearer do the symptoms of decline in the United Kingdom become.<br /><br />If Europe ever becomes a museum, it won't take much to set up a department called "Early Industrial Age" in Birmingham or Newcastle. Great Britain is rusting. It has become a sluggish, despondent and anxious country. An article of clothing currently popular among young Britons is the "onesie," a sort of playsuit for adults who like to spend their days lounging in comfort -- assuming they don't have to go to work.<br /><br />Great Britain is currently undergoing a shift. There is a growing distance between the periphery and the center, among the individual parts of the kingdom and between the top and the bottom of society, and Brexit has the potential to magnify these issues, breaking up the union.<br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br />International Affairs Expert<br /><br />Photo-Credit: AP: British Flag<br /><b></b><br /><b></b></div></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-91663847052557807202017-04-05T14:11:00.000+02:002017-04-05T14:11:10.266+02:00AFRICA: The Misplaced ''Africa Rising'' Narrative<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">Recent high growth rates and increased foreign investment in Africa have led to the popular idea that Africa is on track to become the next global economic powerhouse. This “Africa Rising” narrative has been presented in cover articles by <span class="caps">TIME</span> Magazine and The Economist among many others in recent years. <br /><br />But while there have indeed been positive economic developments in some African countries, this enthusiasm is misplaced because it neglects the hard fact that Africa is actually quite far from “developing” – at least in the conventional sense.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0dM9pFDBl0I/UoZ_EHHY6GI/AAAAAAAAChY/9Izt90HS9PQ/s1600/_68215948_africa_econ624x410%5B1%5D.gif" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="210" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0dM9pFDBl0I/UoZ_EHHY6GI/AAAAAAAAChY/9Izt90HS9PQ/s320/_68215948_africa_econ624x410%5B1%5D.gif" width="320" /></a></div><br />Beginning with the UK, and followed by Europe, the US, Japan, the 4 Tigers of East Asia and China, the rich countries figured out the best way to significantly increase incomes and reduce poverty was to progressively shift from an economy based on activities with diminishing returns over time (primary agriculture and extractives such as oil, mining, gas, logging and fisheries) towards activities that tended to provide increasing returns over time (manufacturing and higher-end services). <br /><br />The colonial powers outlawed manufacturing from occurring in the colonies precisely because they understood its benefits, which they intended to keep for themselves: it creates more and higher-paying jobs (which tends to lift all wages across the economy), supports new higher-paying services jobs and the overall diversification of the economy, and contributes substantially to the domestic tax base, which in turn, allows for greater long-term public investment in health, education, agriculture and infrastructure.<br /><h6>Losing Ground</h6>Although it had been widely understood for 400 years, over just the last few decades the very idea of “national” economic development has been downplayed and replaced by the idea of “globalization” – i.e., just plugging into the global economy right now regardless of the level of economic development a country is at. <br /><br />The idea of national economic development has been further displaced in recent decades by the popular notion of “poverty reduction” and an emphasis on the social sector indicators (as highlighted by the UN’s Millennium Development Goals or “MDGs”) to the near total exclusion of conventional national economic development indicators. <br /><br />If such conventional factors were still considered, we would be asking if manufacturing as a percent of <span class="caps">GDP</span>, or the percent of manufacturing value-added (<span class="caps">MVA</span>) in exports, has been going up over time or not. And we would be alarmed by the answers.<br /><br />A recent UN study on such indicators in Africa finds that despite some improvements in a few countries, the bulk of African countries are either stagnating or moving backwards in terms of industrialization. The share of <span class="caps">MVA</span> in Africa’s <span class="caps">GDP</span> fell from 12.8 percent in 2000 to 10.5 percent in 2010. Over the same time period, there was also a decline in the importance of manufacturing in Africa’s exports, with the share of manufactures in Africa’s total exports having fallen from 43 to 39 percent. <br /><br />In terms of manufacturing growth, while most have stagnated, 23 African countries actually had negative <span class="caps">MVA</span> per capita growth over the period 1990–2010 and only 5 countries had an <span class="caps">MVA</span> per capita growth above 4 percent. The study also finds that Africa is also losing ground in labor-intensive manufacturing, with its share of low technology manufacturing activities in <span class="caps">MVA</span> having fallen from 23 percent in 2000 to 20 percent in 2010, and the share of low-technology manufacturing exports in Africa’s total manufacturing exports having dropped from 25 percent in 2000 to 18 percent in 2010. Such statistics are at odds with the “Africa rising” narrative.<br /><br />In fact, today many African countries remain locked into traditional colonial patterns of trade in which they largely export primary commodities in raw form and import more advanced manufactured goods from richer countries.<br /><br />In striking contrast to free trade theory taught in most universities over the last few decades, the industrialized countries used a wide array of industrial policies (trade protection, subsidies, subsidized credit, supportive technology policies and publically supported R&amp;D, and supportive macroeconomic policies) often for decades at time when they were first building their manufacturing sectors. <br /><br />African countries must adopt the same policy approaches for the same reasons if they ever hope to industrialize as well. However, it is a major problem that today key industrial policies are being increasingly outlawed as countries’ policy space is reduced in <span class="caps">WTO</span> negotiations and in a range of proposed regional and bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) and bilateral investment treaties (BITs) that rich countries are pressuring African countries to sign.<br /><h6>“Industrialization is not a luxury for Africa”</h6>Importantly, this is the central issue at the annual meeting of African finance and economic development ministers, where ministers explore how African countries could design and implement more effective industrial strategies and policies that will support the promotion of value addition and economic transformation and reduce dependence on the export of unprocessed material. Former Chair of African Union Commission, Madam Nkosazana Clarice Dlamini-Zuma, once observed: “Industrialization is not a luxury for Africa, but a necessity for its long-term survival.”<br /><br />But in order to industrialize, these African leaders must defy the short-term commercial pressures of richer countries and foreign investors by being willing to renegotiate free trade agreements and investment treaties, or not sign on to new ones that reduce the “policy space” they will need to build up their own manufacturing sectors over time. <br /><br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br />International Affairs Expert<br /><br />Photo-Credit:&nbsp;UN’s Millennium Development Goal (“MDGs”)&nbsp;-Chart&nbsp;showing Africa economic growth-Photo.</div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-91491333513865465252017-04-04T14:12:00.000+02:002017-04-04T14:12:03.914+02:00MIDDLE-EAST: What should be Trump's strategy?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">US president Donald Trump moved to reset US relations with Egyptian president Abdel Fattah al Sisis on Monday, giving him firm backing and vowing to work together to fight Islamist terrorists. A joint statement said the two leaders agreed on the importance of advancing peace throughout the Middle East.<br /><br />Grappling with unstable, unruly, and reprobate Middle Eastern nations, and by extension North African ones, has constantly been and will continue to be a major challenge for Trump's administration. Attempts by Iran and Saudi Arabia to expand their regional influences by interfering in the internal affairs and ethno-sectarian tensions of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Bahrain, and Yemen have worsened instability in Middle East.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-epuM0vaxZI0/WOONLSwNKeI/AAAAAAAADg4/R8zuIRXUN8chHq2LGsDChuvQ45YKQBuwACLcB/s1600/9184c32716d00787c5c1f676a9cf209714b17b9a_0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-epuM0vaxZI0/WOONLSwNKeI/AAAAAAAADg4/R8zuIRXUN8chHq2LGsDChuvQ45YKQBuwACLcB/s320/9184c32716d00787c5c1f676a9cf209714b17b9a_0.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />Now Riyadh and Tehran have been drawn into the region’s bloody civil wars—directly with Iranian forces in Syria and Iraq and with Saudi troops in Bahrain and Yemen to bolster client regimes, or through surrogates such as Sunni rebels in Syria and Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hamas in Gaza.<br /><br /><b><i>What should be Trump's strategy?</i></b><br /><br />These are just some of the problems that Trump's administration must confront. Trump must try to end civil wars and tamp down interstate rivalries. Attention must simultaneously be focused on other challenges arising from faltering economies, increasing terrorism, rising numbers of displaced persons, development of weapons of mass destruction, and leaders willing to trigger regional confrontations as a way of distracting their citizenry from domestic woes.<br /><br />Of course all the other problems confronting Trump's administration will pale in comparison with terrorism—a constant concern in the West and a constant reality in the Middle East.<br /><br />Since 1979, Sunni Islamists, including Al-Qaeda and its affiliates, offshoots, and rivals such as the Taliban, Jabhat al-Nusra, Al-Shabaab, Islamic State (IS, also known as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or ISIS and as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant or ISIL), and its own affiliates such as Ansar al-Shari’a, Boko Haram, and others, have carried out approximately 1,279 terror attacks, 428 suicide bombings, and thirty-four mass murders of at least one hundred victims.<br /><br />Their plots have been uncovered on every continent except Antarctica. At least seven attacks have occurred within the United States since 9/11. The European Union (EU) has witnessed carnage in Madrid, London, Paris, and Brussels. These groups have been central players in wars and civil wars within Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, and Chechnya among other places—causing thousands of casualties, millions of displacements, and billions of dollars in losses and expenses.<br /><br />The Islamic State now holds significant territory in Syria and Iraq, and has operatives, strongholds, and support networks in Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, South and Southeast Asia, and southeast Europe. Although not making such territorial claims, Al-Qaeda is represented in Tunisia, Algeria, Yemen, and Saudi Arabia plus further east in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.<br /><br />IS, Al-Qaeda, and others expand their reach in ways quite similar to one another, typically by flooding the Internet with perverted calls to duty and service and by dispatching charismatic representatives to set up regional command posts and to identify and recruit local insurrectionists. They establish sources of local revenue to supplement now-diminishing external sources to fund their operations. IS’s smuggling in Syria and Iraq includes oil, natural gas, human organs, and antiquities. The Taliban and Al-Qaeda are active in narcotics and human trafficking. Boko Haram generates revenue through systematic kidnapping and ransoms.<br /><br />A coalition of thirty-four Muslim nations was established in December 2015 to combat these Sunni terrorist organizations. But its power players—Saudi Arabia, the Persian Gulf Emirates, Turkey, and Egypt—are busy quashing Muslims like the Houthis who do not follow Sunnism, thwarting separatists like the Kurds, and subduing internal dissidents ranging from the Muslim Brotherhood to democracy activists instead of focusing fully on the real threat.<br /><br />Although the ideas may come from extreme interpretations of Islam, especially those of the Wahhabi sect in Saudi Arabia, terrorism feeds on despondency, alienation, sectarianism, and subsequent conflicts that arise from governance inadequacies and economic disparities. Trump must find a way to persuade Middle Eastern leaders—allies and foes alike—to mitigate those root causes of religio-political violence.<br /><br />Regional Sunni versus Shiite power-plays between Saudi Arabia and Iran also fuel terrorism and impede effective counterterrorism. Trump must exert his administration’s diplomatic energies to persuade Middle East rivals to resist the temptation to inflame sectarian tensions in the pursuit of their religio-political goals because it is ultimately detrimental to themselves, the region, and the global community.<br /><br />Trump will also have to convince them and others in that region to work actively with the West in snuffing terrorism’s ideology and resources. The president must also endeavor through diplomacy and sanctions to moderate the fundamentalist tendencies not only of the Sunni elites in Saudi Arabia but also the Shiite clerics in Iran.<br /><br />Trump's strategy should seek victory not mere containment. To succeed in the long term, the overall strategy will have to be holistic because the Islamist terror phenomenon shares common funding sources, extremist religious views, ideologues, fighters, and financiers. Ending Sunni terrorism requires eliminating not only established groups but nascent ones too. It will also involve convincing Sunni and Shiite regimes to scale back state support for the majority faith and to grant greater freedom of worship and tolerance to non-Muslims.<br /><br />In meeting all these challenges, Trump must acknowledge that the Middle East’s problems have dire implications for the United States and the rest of the world. It is no secret that solving them is a long-term endeavor. U.S. policy toward the Middle East should be comprehensive and proactive. It must be forward-looking, forward planning, and multidimensional.<br /><br />The United States will need to provide reassurance and resources where and when needed, while taking effective actions against troublemakers. To gain legitimacy in the region, U.S. policy must address not just American and European concerns but those of Middle Easterners too. And, above all, the United States must remain constantly engaged in the region.<br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />International Affairs Expert<br />Political Analyst/Author<br /><br />Photo-Credit: AFP-photo</div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-3126049893543217012017-04-03T15:16:00.001+02:002017-04-03T15:16:39.914+02:00U.S.: How Trump should deal with North Korea?<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Responding to North Korea defiance involves a deep strategic dilemma: Because of the regime's paranoia and insecurity, any response on the part of the US and its allies, even a measured one, risks sparking dangerous, even disastrous escalation.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">The US president, Donald Trump, accuses China of not doing enough to tackle the issue of North Korea and stated that the US is ready and able to tackle the North Korea threat, with or without the help of China and&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">'s national security aides have already compiled a list of options, both economic and military, that trump will have at his disposal against North Korea.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Trump suggested that China is the one country that must do more or has the political clout to tackle the issue of North Korea's nuclear and missile programs.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Although China might have a measure of influence on North Korea, Trump is mistaken to assume that China is able to dictate Pyongyang' s foreign policy and political decisions.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8p8vjt-jbzg/WOJHlZcDuyI/AAAAAAAADgo/39f5cJUI1AgYR9DYW_I674Jt8ICIJCZgQCLcB/s1600/69a03764a9a50286580b236b4968a6d1c31377eb_1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="215" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-8p8vjt-jbzg/WOJHlZcDuyI/AAAAAAAADgo/39f5cJUI1AgYR9DYW_I674Jt8ICIJCZgQCLcB/s320/69a03764a9a50286580b236b4968a6d1c31377eb_1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">China's willingness to pressure Pyongyang is limited and cannot alone persuade North Korea to give up its nuclear program because North Korea could turn its hostility toward China if Beijing pushes too much. But also, China's hesitation is a foreign policy tactic to keep North Korea as &nbsp;a buffer zone that separates China and the US' sphere on influence, meaning China must not endanger Pyongyang domestic stability through sanctions.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The contradictions of Chinese policy are shown by its provision of launch trucks for North Korean mobile missiles, in violation of international sanctions, followed by Beijing’s acceptance of a U.N. Security Council resolution tightening sanctions on Pyongyang and indications that China would cut assistance if North Korea undertook further nuclear tests.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Unlike other aggressively insecure states, there is little indication that the North Korean regime can be placated by US threats or Beijing's pressure. Pyongyang's paranoia is not simply a reflection of its strategic predicament, but an ingrained element of its identity. However,&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">failing to respond to provocation seems to encourage the North Koreans to push even harder and more violently, using their sordid talent for using threats to extort concessions and aid to compensate for the state’s economic failure.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><b style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><i>What, then should the US do?</i></b><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Given this, the United States needs a careful plan for how to respond.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Certainly efforts</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;to&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">offer Beijing a ''grand bargain'' like withdrawing some US forces from the region in exchange for pacifying Pyongyang, could be the starting point since&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Beijing has been irritated over the US decision to use a pretext for assembling the advanced THAAD missile defense system in South Korea.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">China has repeatedly warned the US not to exacerbate the tensions on its borders by beefing up its military capabilities in the vicinity of the South and East China seas. At the same time, Beijing continues to be suspicious of Washington's policy toward Taiwan, which China considers an inherent part of the mainland.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Most importantly, the United States should issue an explicit policy statement on North Korean provocation to diminish the chances of miscalculation by Kim Jong Un. The statement should indicate that the United States will shoot down any North Korean rocket or missile aimed at or crossing over the United States or an allied state.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Washington should state that a nuclear demonstration will result in a sustained U.S. campaign against North Korea military targets. And, importantly, the United States should clearly state that any major attack by North Korea against American targets or allies will result in the removal of the Kim regime and the building of a democracy in North Korea.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Regime replacement would be immensely expensive in both blood and money, especially at a time when the American military and defense budget is being highly politicized. But North Korea is the only nation on earth where internal conflicts or regime psychosis, rather than any external actions, might prompt the regime to unleash a nuclear or conventional Armageddon. For this reason, it is vital that Kim and his cronies clearly understand the costs of future violations of UNSC resolutions.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Political Analyst/Writer</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Photo-Credit: AFP-photo</span></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-525167178505596192017-03-31T13:07:00.003+02:002017-03-31T13:07:21.305+02:00GERMANY: ''Islamic Law'' Proposal Debate<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">There is a fierce debate within German government rather Germany should introduce an ''Islamic law'', as it is the case in neighboring Austria, or implement laws that curtailed mosques from foreign aids.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">There are more than 4 million Muslim in Germany and only 1 million of them are German citizens.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The proposed ''Islamic Law'' would include cutting off foreign aids to mosques, the registration of all mosques in the country, the training of imams, language test for all Islamic clerics and a compulsory use of German language in their teachings.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The proponents of the proposal argue that the introduction of ''Islamic Law'' in Germany would insure transparency into wider Muslim community practices, in a country whose imams come from abroad and financed from foreign sources. The opponents, however, claim that the country's constitution allows religion communities to organize and administer their own affairs.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uHaUAs3IIeM/WN42cHTe-wI/AAAAAAAADgY/21nslDFXvB8_ojU9dXNJgNaQtDCtllRZwCLcB/s1600/th%2B%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uHaUAs3IIeM/WN42cHTe-wI/AAAAAAAADgY/21nslDFXvB8_ojU9dXNJgNaQtDCtllRZwCLcB/s1600/th%2B%25281%2529.jpg" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Both proponents and opponents of this proposed introduction of ''Islamic Law'' agree that the training of imams is paramount for clear understanding of German's democratic values and religious freedom. The training of imams would</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;provide Muslim congregations with spiritual leaders who know both the language and the realities that German Muslims face in their everyday lives – knowledge that imams coming from abroad may not be able to provide in sufficient measure.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Compared to the status of other Muslim communities in Europe, Germany's constitution contains some very notable rights for Muslims within state institutions such as the army or prisons, e.g. the right to halal food and the right to spiritual guidance by imams. But&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Germany’s proposal of Islam Law is &nbsp;nevertheless controversial, especially when it comes to cutting Muslim communities off from foreign payments and it</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;is being criticized by the large Muslim organizations in Germany for promoting an air of suspicion towards Muslims.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Germany's Muslim organizations &nbsp;are already threatening to take the matter to the Supreme Court, to stop the proposal becomes law. The representatives of Muslim communities disapprove of being treated differently compared to other religious communities, the main problem being that the proposal would &nbsp;ban financing from abroad, which means cutting money coming mainly from Turkey and Saudi Arabia.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Germany's Muslim organizations’ criticism may be understandable to a certain extent. Being recognized as a historical part of the society makes it easier to negotiate and voice concerns and problems. The proposal and the ban of foreign financing are a way of acknowledging that Germany’s Muslims are exactly that:</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;Germany</span><span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">’s</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Muslims and not Turkey’s or Bosnia-Herzegovina’s or Saudi Arabia’s. The spirit of this proposal operates on the rationale that they are there to stay, a historical and natural part of Germany.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Germany's Muslim community organizations point out what is missing and where the proposal falls short. The main criticism – Muslim communities will be banned from financing themselves with foreign money whereas the same rule does not apply, for instance, to Russian Orthodox communities – is valid to the extent that the proposal does not treat all religious communities the same. But it does not necessarily mean that the thought behind the proposed ban on foreign financing is false.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Eventually, the solution could be to also extend the ban to all religious communities.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The problem of foreign financing for Muslim communities may also be a different one than for Russian Orthodox ones. Russian Orthodox Christianity is already fully acknowledged and integrated into all Western societies as it is part of the faith that is supposedly common to all European societies, namely Christianity. Islam has not arrived at this point yet.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">If the proposal becomes law, ( I don't see that happening very soon), Germany's Muslims will have to make a choice. It is in their own interest to cut off foreign payments that are hindering both their own integration and acceptance by the larger non-Muslim German society. They can be Erdogan’s plaything in his fights with Europe, perceived as Turkish and incapable or unwilling of being integrated. Or they can emancipate themselves from this patron that can do little for them as he is not the prime minister of the country they actually live in, and pledge belonging to their actual home, Germany. This is where their lives and futures lie.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The wave of proposal of the introduction of Islamic law or Islamic law in some European countries stands as a unique reminder in Western European societies: Islam and Muslims have been part of the continent for over one hundred years. The definition of the continent’s identity as predominantly Christian may be correct, but it is incomplete. Through their geographical vicinity and also through various wars with the Ottoman Empire, Islam and Muslim communities have been part of European societies for centuries.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">European Union members such as Bulgaria or future candidates such as Bosnia-Herzegovina, both countries with large Muslim or Turkish communities, remind us that the continent has always been much more diverse than we like to tell ourselves. The sooner we start acknowledging this, the sooner we can create more inclusive societies and develop a new, more complex and historically maybe more accurate European identity.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span>By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />International Affairs Expert<br />Political Analyst/Author<br /><br />Photo-Credit: AFP-Getty Images photo</div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-76656954556625551602017-03-30T14:48:00.002+02:002017-03-30T14:48:50.305+02:00EUROPE: Poverty & Inequality<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div style="text-align: justify;">Socio-economic inequalities in Europe are greater today than in the 1980s. Austerity measures introduced after the financial crisis in 2007-2008 include cuts in public spending, the privatization of services, and deregulation of labor markets. All these measures have hit the poorest hardest.<br /><br />Between 2009-2015, the number of Europeans living without enough money to heat their homes or cope with unforeseen expenses, known as ''severe material deprivation'', rose by 7,5 million to 50 million people. These are among the 123 million people, almost q quarter of the EU's population, at risk of living in poverty, while the continent is home to 342 billionaires.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Almost ten years after of the financial crisis 2007-2008 in Europe, inequality has increased dramatically. Conservative governments across Europe continue to turn a blind eye to the growing divisions in society, despite the shocking realities. In Greece, infant mortality is up 43% because of dramatic cuts to healthcare services. In Spain, over 400,000 families have been evicted from their homes. Youth unemployment affects a quarter of young Europeans on average and in some countries, like Greece and Spain, half of young people are unable to find work.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"></div><br />The gender pay gap stand at a depressing 16.4%, with further deteriorations in women’s pay in several countries in recent years. Spending on education has effectively dropped in over 20 countries of the European Union. Without adequate education and training and with few decent jobs available, opportunities are sadly limited on the world’s richest continent.&nbsp;Employment is becoming increasingly unstable; short-term and part-time contracts, temping agencies and low wages have undermined the job security of many Europeans.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q05BOWt9x24/WNz-NvxJrqI/AAAAAAAADgI/CFVf9q8zxm0asd6Gv6y-JXvcIc1BkbZNACEw/s1600/top-10-poorest-in-eu.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Q05BOWt9x24/WNz-NvxJrqI/AAAAAAAADgI/CFVf9q8zxm0asd6Gv6y-JXvcIc1BkbZNACEw/s320/top-10-poorest-in-eu.png" width="279" /></a></div></div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Inequality is the number one challenge of the 21st century. To get out of the crisis, the kind of unbalanced, feeble recovery some countries have shown is not enough.&nbsp;Genuine change will require the creation of jobs with decent salaries, the wider availability of education and training and much greater upward social mobility. To this end, investment in growth and job creation is essential.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Public investment in sustainable jobs, to revitalise growth, industry and domestic demand, is key to bridging the widening gap. It is the combination of equal access to equal public services – notably healthcare and education – and decent jobs with opportunities for upward social mobility that can effectively reduce inequalities.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Europe must lead the fight for equality. Suffocating austerity measures hitting the poorest and unfair and regressive tax systems allowing multinational corporations to evade billions of euros in taxes, heaping the tax burden on individuals citizens have exacerbated inequalities. A long-term investment strategy for sustainable, high-tech and research-based jobs, as well as modern industry and manufacturing, will reduce inequalities and return Europe to its global leadership role.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Europe’s social model of welfare will no longer be sustainable if a majority of citizens can barely scrape by and have no security or opportunity instead of contributing to the welfare pots.&nbsp;Millions of new jobs – stable jobs with decent pay – are needed, to give people hope and opportunities, especially for Europe’s young people.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Yet the issue of inequalities cannot be reduced to socio-economic barriers, they occur elsewhere in society, too.&nbsp;The fundamental principles of the European project are based on the premise of opportunity. Free movement, a single market and guarantees for the rule of law and non-discrimination are pillars of an equal society.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Yet these pillars can no longer be taken for granted. Free movement is constantly attacked with xenophobia and accusations of ‘benefit tourism’ against those who seek to build lives elsewhere outside their own country. In reality, only 2.7% of Europeans live in an EU country where they are not citizens and the overwhelming majority of these contribute more and take less from the social security systems of their new home countries than its citizens do.&nbsp;Equality as a form of non-discrimination is under attack, with minorities, especially the Roma community and LGBTI people, regularly facing blatant discrimination. Race, ethnicity, gender and sexual orientation still matter when they should not.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />It is the European Union’s duty to address these inequalities wherever they occur and to lay the ground for national legislators to implement policies that foster equality and social justice.&nbsp;If the recovery is focused on guaranteeing social justice, investment in growth and job creation can help reduce socio-economic inequalities. But beyond that, the European Union must rekindle the public’s sense that fairness is a value worth defending in our society.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />Equality must be at the heart of every European policy – be it completing the banking union, protecting small savers, investment policy, creating decent jobs, protecting the environment and consumers, or ensuring the safety of European citizens.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br />The Socialists and Democrats are aware of the difference. Fighting for fairness means fighting for all Europeans. After the years of crippling conservative austerity which has divided Europeans and deepened the inequalities in our society, it is time to bring equality and opportunity back to the centre of EU policy making.</div><div style="text-align: justify;"><br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br />International Affairs Expert<br /><br />Photo-Credit: AFP</div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-50061757417757263912017-03-28T14:36:00.003+02:002017-03-28T14:36:58.336+02:00SCOTLAND: Self-Determination Ambitions<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div style="border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><div style="border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;The excitement around the ''Brexit'' has subsided, but the problem remains that Scotland questions state structures in United Kingdom after Brexit.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Just a day before Britain kick starts Brexit proceedings, the Scottish parliament is expected to dismiss prime Minister Theresa May's overtures and back calls for a fresh independence referendum.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Sturgeon and May met in Scotland on Monday, with the prime minister reiterating that ''now is not the time'' for a referendum and describing the four nations of the United Kingdom as an ''unstoppable force''.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">But the SNP leader maintained that an independence vote should be held by spring 2019 at the latest before Britain leaves the European Union, although after winning the backing of Scottish parliament, she needs approval from London for a referendum to take place.&nbsp;Rejecting such request would be politically risky for May, whose government is also trying to prevent the collapse of the power-sharing arrangement which governs Northern Ireland.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-te9ybn-hunw/WNpXiyL3RyI/AAAAAAAADf4/zvQ4AM1g-VQRcIK_PtIQr0nKxgwpVobNgCLcB/s1600/5f89e4771c6be79f8913b1ec7e4662cd38f5411e_1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-te9ybn-hunw/WNpXiyL3RyI/AAAAAAAADf4/zvQ4AM1g-VQRcIK_PtIQr0nKxgwpVobNgCLcB/s320/5f89e4771c6be79f8913b1ec7e4662cd38f5411e_1.jpg" width="320" /></a></span></div><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The Brexit vote last year has spurred the independence campaign of Sturgeon, head of the ruling Scottish National Party(SNP), who argues that Scotland is being forced out the European Union against its will.&nbsp;</span>Both Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the European Union, but they were outnumbered by voters in England and Wales, who backed Brexit.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span class="caps">There is</span>&nbsp;a more general trend across Europe as ancient nations, regions, and peoples, currently under the jurisdiction of various states, are increasingly calling for either enhanced autonomy or outright independence and for all the benefits that go with bringing decision-making power back to the people.<br /><br />Gaining independence or regaining independence is, globally, a standard democratic process. In Europe, more than half of current states did not exist just a century ago. Between the 20th and 21st century, 28 new European states have emerged. Contrary to what the mainstream media and political parties, and to an extent the EU, would have people believed, recent events show that the desire for independence and the creation of new states is completely normal, almost routine, and all part of the process for mature democracies.<br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span>Independence for Scotland will of course bring numerous benefits. Scotland is likely to follow Norway’s path and be freed up to realize its true potential as an innovative and energy-rich north European nation. But independence is about so much more than economics; it is about the right to decide on every aspect of your country’s future and not to have to follow the commands issued from capitals such as London. Independence brings freedom, the sovereignty of a people, and ultimately self-respect.<br /><br />This last notion no doubt helps fuel the desire for independence. How can any self-respecting Scot look around and see their Slovene or Estonian EU colleagues sit at top table, being stakeholders in the European decision-making process, while Scots sit waiting to hear what London tells them.<br /><br />Furthermore, independence is a wholly pragmatic choice, especially in a Europe that inadvertently promotes that option by only investing EU decision-making power with States and not regions. One example is, Luxembourg, Scotland and fisheries. Although Luxembourg doesn't have any coastline, it has a full seat in the EU Fisheries Council, while Scotland, with an economy partly dependent on fisheries, has no say and no seat on the EU Fisheries Council.<br /><br />The self-determination issue takes center stage in &nbsp;Brexit negotiations. The era of the old-fashioned nation-states is over. It’s time for a Europe of Latvia, Ireland, Scotland, Brittany and Catalonia as well as Portugal, Sweden and Austria, a Europe in which old nations can finally start to work together on the basis of equality.<br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"></span></div><div style="border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Therefore, it is completely comprehensible from a European perspective that European officials should begin discussing whether an independent Scotland should simply be granted immediate entry into the European Union, after Brexit.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Scotland previously belonged to the EU, and it would be in the interest of a united Europe to have no doubt of the continued existence of this association.&nbsp;</span></div></div><div style="border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Political Analyst/Author</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Photo-Credit:&nbsp;</span><br /><span class="caps"></span></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-87339397441485619832017-03-10T13:17:00.003+01:002017-03-10T13:17:55.379+01:00WORLD: Cyber Superiority<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">The Europe Union and NATO accuse Russia of orchestrating cyber-war in Europe. European Union officials believe that there had been a step-change in Russia's behaviour and raise concerns that Russia is trying to influence the upcoming election in Germany and France.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Last month, Russia denied that it was involved in an attempt coup during Montenegro's election, after a Montenegrin prosecutor claimed Russia had played a role in an attempted putsch to stop the country joining NATO.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Russia officials claim that the U.S. has been doing exactly that for so many years. They base their argument on Wikileaks' publication, on Tuesday, of thousands of pages on internal CIA hacking techniques used over several years. Russia believes that the CIA hacking techniques have been also used against foreign countries, as Snowden's leaks revealed.</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BCC37jjB67Q/WMKZL3mzAcI/AAAAAAAADfk/23qmsLkHlukjqx-RTdpwx9c7wAyUbTZPACLcB/s1600/th%2B%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BCC37jjB67Q/WMKZL3mzAcI/AAAAAAAADfk/23qmsLkHlukjqx-RTdpwx9c7wAyUbTZPACLcB/s1600/th%2B%25281%2529.jpg" /></a></span></div><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Wikileaks' publication appeared to supply specific details to what has been long known on the abstract:U.S. intelligence agencies, like their allies and adversaries, are constantly working to discover and exploit flaws in any manner of technology products.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">In fact, in recent years, the CIA underwent a restructuring focus more on cyber war to keep pace with the increasing digital sophistication of foreign adversaries. The CIA is prohibited by law from collecting intelligence that details domestic activities of Americans and is generally restricted in how it may gather any U.S. intelligence data for counterintelligence purposes.</span><br /><br />In the aftermath of U.S. election 2016, discussions about cyber war became more realistic and less theoretical. The volume of cyber attacks is only likely to grow. Military leaders in the US and its European NATO partners are outfitting new battalions for the impending data war.<br /><div><br />The Pentagon launched its much-anticipated “Strategy for Operating in Cyberspace” in July 2011, it appeared the US military was interested only in protecting its own computer networks, not in attacking anyone else’s.&nbsp; Today,&nbsp;the US Air Force budget request include $4 billion in proposed spending to achieve “cyberspace superiority,”.<br /><div itemprop="articleBody"><div itemprop="articleBody"><br />Much of the cyber talk around the Pentagon these days is about offensive operations. It is no longer enough for cyber troops to be deployed along network perimeters, desperately trying to block the constant attempts by adversaries to penetrate front lines. The US military’s geek warriors are now prepared to go on the attack, armed with potent cyberweapons that can break into enemy computers with pinpoint precision.<br /><br />The new interest in attacking enemies rather than simply defending against them has even spread to the business community. Like their military counterparts, cybersecurity experts in the private sector have become increasingly frustrated by their inability to stop intruders from penetrating critical computer networks to steal valuable data or even sabotage network operations. The new idea is to pursue the perpetrators back into their own network.<br /><br />A cyberweapon could take down computer networks and even destroy physical equipment without the civilian casualties that a bombing mission would entail. Used preemptively, it could keep a conflict from evolving in a more lethal direction. The targeted country would have a hard time determining where the cyber attack came from.</div></div><br />Achieving “cyber superiority” in a twenty-first-century battle space is analogous to the establishment of air superiority in a traditional bombing campaign. Before strike missions begin against a set of targets, air commanders want to be sure the enemy’s air defense system has been suppressed. Radar sites, antiaircraft missile batteries, enemy aircraft, and command-and-control facilities need to be destroyed before other targets are hit.<br /><br />Similarly, when an information-dependent combat operation is planned against an opposing military, the operational commanders may first want to attack the enemy’s computer systems to defeat his ability to penetrate and disrupt military’s information and communication networks.<br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Cyberspace is increasingly becoming a place of risk and danger, vulnerable to hacks and cyber warfare. With today's civilization dependent on interconnected cyber systems to virtually operate many of the critical systems that make our daily lives easier, it is obvious that cyber warfare can be the choice for many governments and states, for military, economic and political reasons.</span><br /><div id="spArticleColumn" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/Article"><div id="spArticleSection"><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br />International Affairs Expert<br /><br />Photo-Credit: Getty Images/AFP</div></div></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-17570191075942016912017-03-08T16:32:00.000+01:002017-03-08T16:32:02.744+01:00E.U./U.S.-RUSSIA: Understanding the politics of Sanctions<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Political experts both in Russia and elsewhere suggested that the election of Donald Trump as the new US president may lead to the lifting on anti-Russia sanctions by America and its allies, based on Trump's statements that he would work with Russia. However Russia officials warn against such optimism, knowingly that campaign rhetoric does not necessarily translate into policies.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Moscow believes that the sanctions tit-for-tat with the EU was beneficial to some sectors of the Russian economy, particularly agriculture, and that the government helps domestic producers capitalize on the situation.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The West sanctions were imposed in response to Russia's support of popular separatist movements in regions of Ukraine opposed to the coup in Kiev, which impose a new government hostile to Russia. The predominantly Russian region of Crimea voted in referendum to rejoin Russia, while large ports of Donesk and Lugansk in eastern Ukraine proclaimed their independence and fought against government troops.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DXqxO1e7kF4/WMAjlfN7WfI/AAAAAAAADfU/7rrhPwlp5e08ifZRbsqvmySjRB82S90gQCLcB/s1600/5884e3aac361885d298b45dc.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="177" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DXqxO1e7kF4/WMAjlfN7WfI/AAAAAAAADfU/7rrhPwlp5e08ifZRbsqvmySjRB82S90gQCLcB/s320/5884e3aac361885d298b45dc.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Responding to sanctions imposed by the EU, Moscow banned the import of the EU-produced foodstuffs. This served as protectionist measure for Russian farmers, who otherwise found it difficult to compete against subsidized European producers. The measure also caused multi billion euro damage to European companies, which lost their markets in Russia.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Moscow also rejects the West's accusation of illegally annexing Crimea, accusing U.S. and E.U of contributing to the escalation of the political crisis.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The EU-U.S. sanction policy against Russia represents not only a fundamental miscomprehension of the interactions amongst the Russian structures of power, but also of the relationship between Russia’s top politicians and the worlds of bureaucracy and business.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The sanction policy is in no way, shape or form working. Sanctions cannot be used as stratagems in the traditional sense of the word. Nor can they function as valid instruments for foreign policy, especially against political giants like the EU or a political entity the size of Russia</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Brussels overestimated the connections and reciprocity between the Russian economic and political elites, assuming that the former had a much greater influence over the latter than is actually the case. Europeans use their own customary political matrix as a starting point to understanding other nations, but in reality this does not correspond to how Russia works. Unlike their counterparts in the West, Russian politicians do not represent any economical advocacy groups or lobbies. On the contrary, the basic principles of bureaucracy, the secret service and the army form their foundations of power.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Here is where the key underestimation of Putin’s powers lies. The Kremlin’s dominance over the media, the widespread domestic TV propaganda and the techniques of external information warfare directly affect Russia’s media portrayal of the sanctions. As a consequence, regardless of any further sanctions that are imposed on Russia, Putin controls the perceptions of the general population.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The Common Foreign and Security Policy of the EU has certain inherent weaknesses in the way it works. On the one hand, this is due to the polarization of the positions that each member state has. On the other hand, EU member states adhere to principles of transparency and democracy, which can on occasion negatively affect the EU’s scope of action in crisis situations.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">In the event of a crisis, in which one is confronting the unapologetically incomparable military potential of Russia, as opposed to those of Syria or Iran, the EU becomes trapped in its own methods of interstate negotiation. Quite the opposite is Putin’s ability to make foreign policy or military decisions on his own. He does not need to make an appointment to discuss the current issues and hop on a plane to Brussels.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The Russian president generally confides in small circles of people whom he trusts. The actual amount of attendees to these private meetings is smaller than the number of members of the Russian Security Council, which normally meets on Mondays. However, this does not mean that Putin excludes himself from other networks. It is understood that he often has to consider the concerns of several interest groups, using the differences and inner quarrels to his advantage according to the famous Byzantine principle of&nbsp;</span><span style="border: 0px; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">divide and conquer</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The way he makes foreign policy decisions also differs substantially from that of his European counterparts. The decision making process of the EU and its disadvantages remain at fault for the lack of action taken by its member countries. Multilateral discussions of this kind rarely, if ever, play a major role in secretive, autocratic regimes such as Russia, which is why they require less time to come to a decision. Complicated supranational systems such as the EU need more time and in this regard cannot compete head-to-head with autocracies.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Russia, US and EU are not moving at the same pace. As a matter of fact, they are at different stages, working at different speeds. Putin makes operational decisions very fast. Yet at the same time, he is struggling to make key strategic decisions, because they require a broad pallet of allies, which Russia simply does not have. He has begun to doubt his own beliefs about his on-going projects, including the Eurasian Union.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The effects of European diplomacy are weak, and the diplomacy of each individual EU state are even weaker. For European officials, diplomacy is a long list of formal and informal operations. For Putin and his subordinates, diplomacy is a chain of secret operations, where the negotiations serve a direct function. An important part of it lies in the use of violence to actively progress and gain actual terrain, as opposed to performing symbolic actions, such as supporting peace processes or freeing hostages.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">After the signing of the Minsk Protocol, the situation in East Ukraine has not improved. In fact, things have actually gotten worse. Peace talks do not lead to a positive exit out of the crisis. In this respect, Europeans are scoring an own goal with their constant appeals for negotiation.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Anti-war parties are gaining ground in France/Germany and all over Europe. A common phrase one often hears in European discourse is, “do you want German soldiers to battle once again against Russians?”&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Provocative questions like this, caused by a fear of Moscow, are deferring ever further any possible help for Ukraine, whose military resources today are no match for Russia.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">And, e</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">ach attempt to negotiate with the separatists, already armed with mighty weapons provided by Russia, only spurs on the Kremlin and the military groups that they are in control.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The diplomatic and humanitarian efforts of current European policies are simply not enough to combat the Ukrainian crisis. The Ukrainian army needs intensive, methodical military provisions and help from its European partners. At the same time, Europeans should abstain from taking part directly in the action. No German, French, Polish or&nbsp;</span><span class="caps" style="border: 0px; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">NATO</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;troops should be sent to the battlefield.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Putin assumes that in further extending an extremely protracted war, the Ukrainian government, which previously committed to an international course of reforms, will not be able to effectively implement those reforms needed. It is very likely therefore that the government will lose the trust of its citizens and of the West. Throughout world history there have been no examples of a government that has successfully managed to accomplish a systematic reform while simultaneously waging war.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Putin’s current concerns are not to further encroach on and eventually capture Kiev. What he actually wants is the continuation of a war and the humanitarian crisis it causes, which will ultimately weaken the government of Poroshenko so much that Ukraine remains another post-soviet failed state , eventually running back into the loving arms of Mother Russia. This is the final stage in the life cycle of an aging autocrat, who is executing his geopolitical dream, and at least he is honest about it.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">A failure to defend Ukraine’s sovereignty will feed the Kremlin’s appetite for military adventures and jeopardize the geostrategic stability of the European continent. Will the EU’s leaders stand up to Putin or will they emulate their predecessors Laval and Chamberlain? The answer to this question will seal the fate of Europe in our time.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Political Analyst/Author</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Photo-Credit: AFP-photo</span></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-8515962814855247862017-03-07T13:01:00.000+01:002017-03-07T13:01:47.999+01:00VENEZUELA: The Debacle of Socialism<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Venezuela, once the wealthiest South American country with vast oil resources, is suffering under runaway inflation of 57 percent a year, the highest rate in the world. And,&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">the growing political violence in Venezuela has its roots in the country’s calamitous economic situation.</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Five years ago, Venezuela had $30 billion in foreign reserves. Now t</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">he Central Bank of Venezuela says that the country is down to just $10 billion in foreign reserves</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Nearly $7 billion of the country's remaining reserves is gold.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Dwindling foreign reserves are only exacerbating the humanitarian crisis in the country. The economic blow has led to food and medical shortages, as well as skyrocketing prices.</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Inflation is expected to rise to 1,660 percent this year and 2,880 percent in 2018. Among the key factors boosting inflation experts see the crashing bolivar , huge government spending, poor management of the country's infrastructure, as well as high level of corruption.</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Aside from the economic scarcity, Venezuela is still no worker’s paradise. With 82 murders for every 100,000 residents, Venezuela is high on the list of the most dangerous countries in the world. A pair of designer shoes can be enough to get somebody killed. The leftist regime seems to be leaning so far over precipice that they have now arrested the popular opposition politician Antonio Ledezma under false accusations.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aDZfp9qKzdU/WL6gLxsMJRI/AAAAAAAADfE/oT-i82zJthUMBLDKYg88dm_Kg6U8YHlJgCLcB/s1600/24BC0E6700000578-0-image-a-22_1421354313349.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="192" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aDZfp9qKzdU/WL6gLxsMJRI/AAAAAAAADfE/oT-i82zJthUMBLDKYg88dm_Kg6U8YHlJgCLcB/s320/24BC0E6700000578-0-image-a-22_1421354313349.jpg" width="320" /></a></span></div><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Chávez wanted to create nothing short of a shining paragon for socialism in the 21st century. In European leftist salons, it was hyped as a model for the future. The story of the charismatic Chávez was in the beginning very alluring. When the Comandante seized Venezuela, it had been ruled by two clan-like, corrupt parties. Oil money flowed only to the ruling class and their minions. The masses of the poor received nothing but crumbs. To make matters worse, those in power in the government and the oil industry hardly bothered to hide their arrogance and contempt for the lower classes.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">There was something in the air when Chávez carried out a putsch against the social-democratic President Carlos Pérez. Though the state was overthrown, and the Lieutenant-Colonel was placed in prison. But for the have-nots the act was a beacon of hope, and Chávez was a hero. Finally, in December 1998 the Comandante was voted into the presidency.</span><br /><span style="text-align: center;"><br /></span><span style="text-align: center;">Under Chávez the unemployment rate sank from 14.5% to under 8%, the poverty rate fell from 50% to around 31.9%, and secondary education for the country’s citizens was offered from 44.8% to 73.3% of the population.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">But there was one problem. Chávez only thought in one dimension: the expansion of the power of the state. His supporters—the “Chávistas”—helped him create a bureaucratic leviathan that extorted full control over society. What was left of the bossed-around private sector he eventually snuffed out. There was a lack of investment in the country’s infrastructure, nor did they attempt to control foreign trade and imports.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The expropriation of the land ownership and building of food production on a socialist model was a fiasco. State-run production co-ops, large-scale breeding farms, and sugar factories soon generated—with the state’s allowance—remarkably low output. With the exception of crude oil, Venezuela today produces nearly nothing! The Socialists have to import three-fourths of their consumer goods, food included.</span><br /><span style="text-align: center;"><br /></span><span style="text-align: center;">The development of an industrial sector did not matter. Lots of funds flowed instead to their allies around the world. Overtime Chávez gave away barrels of oil worth about 260 million euros according to the opposition. He financed his apologists Evo Morales in Bolivia and Rafael Correa in Ecuador, and he carried an ailing Cuban regime on his back.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The fact that Chávez drove a potentially rich country into the ground hasn’t mattered for a long time. At first, the price of oil could only go in one direction: up. Money kept flowing in, allowing Chávez to really play at Socialism. With rigorous redistribution politics the Caudillo succeeded in keeping millions of his followers compliant. Either they found a job in the overinflated apparatus of the state, or they profited through the subsidization of food and cheap gasoline.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Early on the Socialists armed their supporters—ostensibly in order to guard themselves against an invasion by their archenemy the&nbsp;</span><span class="caps" style="border: 0px; font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">USA</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">. In reality they raised their threat potential against any opposition. In certain districts of the capital Caracas the real power lies in the thugs loyal to the government known as “colectivos.” Through its de-facto control of the media, the regime has all the means it needs for a continuous stream of propaganda and disinformation.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">W</span><span style="text-align: center;">ith the plummeting price of oil everything is now really going downhill. The collapse of “21st century Socialism” is now being felt by even the most loyal Chávez followers. The economy shrunk about 4.8 percent in the past year. This year it will be even worse.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Inflation is expected to rise to 1,660 percent this year and 2,880 percent in 2018.</span><span style="text-align: center;">&nbsp;Chávez’s hapless successor Nicolás Maduro’s only ally for maintaining power besides violence is printing money.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Venezuela can barely refinance itself on the credit market. Maduro—who in terms of charisma is closer to Dick Cheney than Chávez—recently went on a begging tour to his “allies” in Russia, China, and Algeria. Though there were friendly words from the Chinese, they are only willing to throw a limited amount of funds into a bottomless pit. Maduro stands naked.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">It’s no wonder that the trained bus driver will not hold out for long. New civil unrest will break out, of this Venezuela experts are certain. Which road Venezuela will take next nobody can say for sure. From a coup by the leftist military or the powerful head of parliament, from a possible transformation to democracy to the total dissolution of the state: It’s all up in the air. The people of Venezuela have hard times in front of them.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The martyrdom of Venezuela is an example for why Socialism cannot work, even when it is pumped with petroleum-millions. Corruption, cronyism, bureaucracy and the lack of private wealth have impeded every initiative.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Also, state planning is less efficient than the market. For example, Maduro fixed price caps –now in the time of inflation—fully out of touch with reality. Milk must be sold below cost—which is a maximum incentive for smuggling.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">What this reveals: 21st century Socialism and economic rationality are operating in parallel universes, which was just as true for 20th century Socialism. But the leftist salons will continue to dream of a better Socialist world.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;">Political Analyst/Author</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, times new roman, serif;">Photo-Credit: AFP-Photo</span></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-23158374419126936612017-03-03T15:33:00.001+01:002017-03-03T15:33:39.010+01:00WORLD: Understanding-The Left & Capitalism-<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The current crisis of capitalism has sent shock waves through the world markets that have reverberated through national governments into the lives and homes of millions of working people across Europe.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">From one perspective, what we are seeing is a crisis of neoliberalism, that is, the strategy of capital since the 1980s to undo the gains of the postwar social-democratic settlement and enrich the minority capitalist elites at the expense of the rest of us. This model seemed to be working very well; it even provided economic growth in many countries for a short time, though, as was later revealed, the growth was predicated on an unsustainable model of debt and financialization which destabilized the world economy.</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Nowhere can we better see the barbaric consequences of the present capitalist system and the logical conclusion of the neoliberal paradigm at work than in today’s huge global inequality: a recent Oxfam report showed that 85 people now own more wealth than the poorest 3.4 billion people on the planet.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Now that the gloss has come off capitalism, its democratic credentials look tarnished. We see diktats imposed on countries, autocrats in place of democrats, and increasing surveillance on people by our governments – otherwise known as spying. No longer can we expect those of each generation to live better lives than those of the previous one. No longer can we say that the market, left to its own devices, can make the world a better place.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DXpvh0Ts5Zk/WLl-XbEW5CI/AAAAAAAADe0/-A10UqZPr5YI0v5Hdf5JtsQQYQRJzL5vQCLcB/s1600/th.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DXpvh0Ts5Zk/WLl-XbEW5CI/AAAAAAAADe0/-A10UqZPr5YI0v5Hdf5JtsQQYQRJzL5vQCLcB/s1600/th.jpg" /></a></span></div></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">In the face of the inevitable attacks on the working class and the poor, there have been protests and resistance, but much of it has been muted and has failed to really threaten the austerity agenda. Why is this? Part of the problem is that the leaders of these movements (social democrats, trade union leaders and so on) know what is at stake.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">In such a deep crisis of capitalism, it is necessary to raise a protest only about the austerity, not to create a movement that could challenge the system. These people are afraid of their own shadows; they are too afraid to unleash the forces at their command lest they accomplish the one thing they don’t want to do – win. After all, that would pose the question: What kind of alternative is there to austerity? More fundamentally, what kind of alternative is needed to a system that creates the need for austerity?</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The debate here is based on the view that the Left is impotent and weak in the face of the crisis. There is some truth to that. The Left has been caught in disarray, unable to rise to the historic struggle in which it finds itself. But this is not true everywhere.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Since the 1960s, the Left has split into an authoritarian-nostalgic Leninism, committed to a party form and a class politics whose historical moment seems to have passed, and a supposedly “new” Left which rejects institutions and the centrality of the class struggle and puts all its faith in the capacity of the people to mobilize autonomously and to produce outside capitalist social relations.</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">The new left parties that have emerged across Europe in the last decade are caught between trying to reclaim the space vacated by social democracy as it transformed itself into social liberalism and reforging a new radical left agenda. There is serious debate within these parties about policy and direction, but what they think is their strength – an appeal to a nostalgic, left, social-democratic model of the past – is actually their weakness. The Right are the ones setting the agenda, the ones who have claimed the word “reforms” and turned them into something that is used to undermine our working conditions and wages and to dismantle the social wage.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The rational basis for the radical Left is still clear today and is in some ways even clearer. But the disjuncture between its arguments and its level of support is even wider. Breaking out of the far left ghetto means finding new ways to connect with people for whom the 1917 revolution is a bygone era. It means breaking from limiting oneself to only defensive struggles in order to advocate an alternative vision of society</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">If the Left is to make gains elsewhere, it cannot pull its punches. It needs a more through anti-capitalist critique of the crisis simply because it is only possible to marshal the full moral and martial arguments against capitalism from a proposed alternative. Otherwise, all we do is tinker with the system at the edges. A bold and clear call for more democratic control of the economy, for a system in which the 1% no longer control the commanding heights of industry and finance but in which the people, the workers, the service users make the decisions.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">In the face of a market system spun out of control, we need to repopularize the idea of democratic planning as the only credible solution to inequality and environmental destruction at the hands of profit-mongers. In the words of the late Rudolf Bahro, worth thinking about today if politics is the art of the possible, the Left has to be resolute in its belief that “Communism is not only necessary, it is possible”.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Political Analyst/Author</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Photo-Credit:&nbsp;</span></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-39333282634750003822017-03-02T15:20:00.000+01:002017-03-02T15:20:21.382+01:00FRANCE: Le Pen- Losing EU Parliament Immunity<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The French political landscape is heading for some dramatic changes as Francois Fillon is pressured to drop off in the presidential race, following allegations of ''fake jobs'', Benoit Hamon's lacklustre campaign. Now ''Front National'' leader Marine Le Pen dominates the news for the wrong reasons.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The European Parliament has voted to strip Marine Le Pen, France’s far right presidential candidate, of her immunity from prosecution in a case relating to violent images she posted on Twitter.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Voting in Brussels on Thursday, parliamentarians concluded that the Front National leader’s posting of images of executions by ISIS was likely to have violated “human dignity.” Ms Le Pen is under investigation by French authorities over the incident, which involves photos from 2015 showing the killing of three hostages.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Front National leader's, Marine Le Pen, tweeted the images with the remark “This is Daesh,” in an apparent reaction to comments made by an academic linking support for the Front National to the rise of the terrorist group.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">The investigation is unrelated to a separate probe into Marine Le Pen concerning allegations&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">of having systematically misappropriated EU funds for party purposes in the European Union Parliament.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uW7uelROVYI/WLgoFhIAqRI/AAAAAAAADek/RjJIhZRFdCooqTZgMG8xU0pJi1eyY4vigCLcB/s1600/AAnHGKp.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-uW7uelROVYI/WLgoFhIAqRI/AAAAAAAADek/RjJIhZRFdCooqTZgMG8xU0pJi1eyY4vigCLcB/s320/AAnHGKp.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Marine Le pen's immunity shields her from prosecution. lifting it would pave the way for legal action to be taken against her. The offence being considered is ''publishing violent images, which under certain circumstances can carry a penalty of three years in prison and a fine of 75,000 euros. It is not the first time that Marine Le pen's immunity is lifted. Marine Le Pen's immunity was lifted before in 2013. She was then prosecuted in 2015 with incitement to discrimination over people's religious beliefs, for comparing Muslims praying in public to the Nazi occupation of France during World War II. Prosecutors eventually recommended the charges to be dropped.</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">In the race for the French presidency:one candidate after the other has stumbled. Nationalist Marine Le Pen campaign is the latest to come almost undone after the European Parliament lifted her immunity. &nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Currently, a big question mark is hovering over Marine Le Pen candidacy, who has looked until now one of the promising contenders. But the European Parliament vote ( stripping Marine Le Pen off her immunity from prosecution ), puts a gigantic stain on her white vest.</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Europeans are keeping close tabs on France in this decisive election year, and the French are giving them plenty to watch. Two months before the final round of voting in the presidential election on May 7, a good portion of the political establishment has already been weeded out of the race. And it currently looks as though the purge won't be slowing down any time soon.</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Right from the get go, President Francois Hollande's disastrous showing in the polls prevented him, the incumbent from running for re-election. His then prime minister Manuel Valls, also got derailed. The conservative Francois Fillon is under immense pressure within the his own party to drop off.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Now the slate of contenders has completely changed and is considerably more exciting than what had been anticipated only a few short weeks ago. France's third most popular sport behind football and rugby--that of calculating the probability of every possible ( and impossible) post-election coalition--has begun filling myriad columns and television programs.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Marine Le Pen has transformed the fascist clique surrounding her father into a modern party, the right-wing populist Front National, with her at the center. Yet even as she hits the stump, she is comfortably secure in the knowledge that she has the support of at least one quarter of the country's voters no matter what she says, and no matter what European Parliament</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;might say about her.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">Indeed, a look at the line-up of candidates with two months to go before the final round of the election leads one unavoidably to the conclusion that the greatest threat facing Front National and Marine Le Pen is the party itself. The European Parliament vote, stripping Marine Le Pen of her immunity, could speed up prosecution case against the Front National leader in another unrelated allegations of&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">misappropriated EU funds for party purposes in the European Union Parliament, derailing her presidential ambitions.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Nevertheless, it remains unlikely that Marine Le Pen will become France's president. The polls may show her making it into the second round of voting, but once there, the current data also shows that she would likely be defeated by an opposing candidate, no matter who it is. At the moment, for example, polls show Macron getting 65 percent of votes in a run-off against Maine Le Pen. One of the certainties you can rely on in France is that Marine Le Pen is constantly seen as the greatest of two evils.</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Still, the rest of Europe is gripped by a feeling of uneasiness as it looks to France in this decisive election year. People have not forgotten that it looked as though Brexit wasn't going to happen until the British actually did vote to leave. And in the U.S., there was widespread confidence, even a week before the election that Donald Trump wouldn't win.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: times, &quot;times new roman&quot;, serif;">In France, the party primaries followed the exact same pattern, the favorites, praised by those in the Paris bubble and in the media, all lost. And outsiders won. Will that trend continue? We won't know until May</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Political Analyst/Writer</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Author/International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: &quot;times&quot; , &quot;times new roman&quot; , serif;">Photo Credit: AFP photo of Madam: Marine Le Pen, au Salon de l'Agriculture, le 28 février 2017</span></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-34723625334180106682017-02-24T13:53:00.000+01:002017-02-24T13:53:49.297+01:00WORLD: Understanding ''Globalization''<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Movements of people, goods, and capital may be substitutes for each other. The first backlash to emerge clearly in the earlier wave of globalization was directed against population mobility, with the major recipients of nineteenth century migration flows adopting increasingly restrictive policies.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">But the major legislation controlling migration in the United States came only in and after the First World War, as did analogous measures in Canada and Australia. With population flows restricted, the countries of outward migration suffered from increased labor market pressure, pushing wages down.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">For them, one alternative strategy to adjustment through migration flows would have been higher rates of economic growth as a result of increased trade, with the trade link acting as a substitute for movements of people. Mediterranean and eastern Europe, for instance, might have exported more products to the richer industrial countries, and thus have employed the workers who were no longer allowed to migrate.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Such development required both trade openness on the part of the recipient countries, and capital flows to make up for savings deficits in the emerging markets of the time. But with increased popular and political sensitivity to trade in the richer countries, and a rush to trade protection, this avenue to growth closed down. The capital markets responded to the new dynamic.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Plb2VnWu2dI/WLAsL5vXKPI/AAAAAAAADeU/cYZqeua-vsU_bpEyLMMjYnOvnKKkJnTtgCLcB/s1600/globalization1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="231" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Plb2VnWu2dI/WLAsL5vXKPI/AAAAAAAADeU/cYZqeua-vsU_bpEyLMMjYnOvnKKkJnTtgCLcB/s320/globalization1.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">As the repayment of the credits that had flowed into the emerging markets in the mid-1920s became problematical, capital markets froze. In the last stage of reaction against globalization, a wave of contagious financial crisis swept the world in the early 1930s. In the aftermath of these financial catastrophes, a fully developed doctrine of anti-globalization swept the world. There was a backlash against every form of international mobility.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">The threat of a radical deglobalization appears much greater now than it did thirteen years ago. After 2008, a new consensus emerged – analogous to that which developed in response to the 1930s Great Depression – that there was too much capital moving in the world with consequences that were too destabilizing.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Finance capital was now not a stabilizer but a metastasizing cancer at the core of capitalism. Two alternative tracks for dealing with the problem: one lies in limiting the global risks built up in the financial sector. But that is a complex issue, and pressure to increase the safety of the banking system by increasing capital ratios in the short run risks contracting bank lending and forcing the world into deflationary adjustment.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">In addition, pressure on big financial institutions to reduce risk and increase capitalization is also often linked with pressure on banks to provide more facilities to their home economies. As a result, the Great Recession after 2008 has produced a resurgence of the debate about the future of finance capital and initiatives tending toward the renationalization of banking.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">But the broader worries about globalization were already well developed before the outbreak of the financial crisis. Economists revised their initially rosy assessments of the impact of globalization on labor markets in industrial countries.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">In the 1990s, most studies painted a relatively benign picture, but over the past five years much higher estimates of the job losses from trade have emerged. Many of the former advocates of globalization in the business and political world of the advanced industrial countries were deeply worried well before 2007, because in their countries globalization seemed to be responsible both for job losses and pay reductions, as well as for apparently illegitimate rewards for the owners of scarce resources, in particular superstars with a reputation, such as sports or entertainment stars, and CEOs who market themselves like superstars.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Until recently, the most dramatic effects of globalization were seen in the market for unskilled labor, and consequently most policy thinkers simply saw better training as an answer. But now, it has also become clear that skilled service jobs (most conspicuously in computer software but also in medical and legal analysis) can also be “outsourced”.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Consequently, the gigantic western middle class – the great winner of the twentieth century – is now extremely alarmed by the prospect that it might be overtaken by an even larger (and harder working) middle class in emerging market countries. The result is not only a political backlash, but also an intense populist concern in the rich industrial countries with corporate governance, corporate abuses, and the excesses of executive pay: in short with a new inequality that seems to follow from globalization.</span><br /><span style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">The causes of the relatively recent rise in inequalities in almost every industrial society despite tax systems that aim at redistribution are complex: but they include inadequate innovation (which as Thomas Piketty points out tends to privilege inherited wealth positions) as well as policies which accidentally or inadvertently increase inequality (as both monetary and fiscal policies followed after the Great Recession have done: cheap money in particular has led to asset and property booms which favor the very rich).&nbsp;</span></span><br /><span style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span></span><span style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">An important driver of the new inequality is also the disintegration of traditional families and the erosion of marriage in poorer households, giving rise to a cycle of underachievement and deprivation. That social disintegration is harder to deal with through conventional policy mechanisms. Inequality, surprisingly, has not been well addressed by attempts to counteract it through fiscal policy.</span></span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Globalization is now on the run. The new backlash naturally terrifies business leaders, who want to devise some appropriate response that will not hurt them too much. Events such as the World Economic Forum, formerly parodied as the fiesta of pro-globalization fanatics, are now packed with presentations by globalization critics and choruses about corporate social responsibility.&nbsp;</span>Even before the most severe phase of the financial crisis, at the opening of the 2008&nbsp;<span class="caps" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">WEF</span>, its founder and guru Klaus Schwab, began by saying that it was now time “to pay for our sins.”&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">It is hard to find defenders of classical rule-bound liberalism at events such as Davos: the readiness with which global captains of business embrace their opponents reminds me rather of the way in which the Florentine ruling and banking house of Medici sponsored the most vociferous and radical critic of commercial culture, the Dominican friar Girolamo Savonarola.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Offering simplistic generalizations to any socio-economic phenomenon is, to put it mildly, problematic, but none are more questionable than those that relate to globalization. Globalization is&nbsp;<span style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">not</span>&nbsp;a single process. There is globalization for virtually everything, including the economy, politics, culture, religion, science, health and medicine, education, and sports. Further, there are profound differences within and between them in how, and the degree to which, they globalize.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">In spite of globalization’s wide range, most academic and popular attention is focused on the economic component. However, even this defies generalization since it, in itself, is highly diverse. One example of a simplistic, even erroneous, generalization is Thomas Friedman’s contention that the world is both growing flatter and rising economically. Clearly, great barriers continue to make the world “hilly”, if not “mountainous”, and billions are falling further behind economically.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">How do we account for the near-universal tendency to equate economic globalization with globalization as a whole or, less extremely, to privilege the economy in discussions of globalization? Obviously, the economy is of enormous importance both macroscopically (e.g., for countries) and microscopically (e.g., to individuals virtually everywhere).&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">In addition, it is implicated, at least to some degree, in all other aspects of globalization. But it is far from being alone in having great significance and in having wide-ranging implications. Among the many other aspects of globalization that have these characteristics are borderless diseases (think of the next viral pandemic), climate change, immigration, the brain drain, the internet (especially social networking), as well as the spread of political and religious ideologies, illegal goods (especially drugs) and terrorism.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">However, those who analyze the economy, especially the economists, are hegemonic in the social sciences. They are also deeply involved in the political world, especially in the U.S., as, for example, Chair of the Federal Reserve. Their thoughts and ideas are also of great interest to the media and economists are often featured in newspaper articles and as “talking heads” on television. &nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Ultimately, it is the capitalist economy, and its impact on all aspects of globalization and of the social world, that gives the economists their great visibility and influence. Given this reality, it is not surprising that most discussions of, and thoughts about, globalization focus on its economic aspects.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">However, it is wrong-headed to reduce globalization to economics, to focus so much attention on economic globalization and, of course, to over-generalize it. No generalization about globalization is more troublesome than the idea that it, especially economic globalization, is somehow ending (a similar argument was made, erroneously, in the wake of the autarchy associated with WW 1).&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">One often hears this today in discussions, especially in the U.S. and Europe, of the efforts to better control, even resurrect, national borders in order to stem the flow of various unwanted products and immigrants. Muslim extremists are currently seeking to create a new caliphate that would presumably put in place barriers to the entry of all sorts of heretical ideas, to say nothing of the heretics who bear them (but not to the oil they- largely Sunnis- want and need to export including, at the moment, even to the hated Alawites [Shiites] in Syria).&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">However, even if these barriers are put in place, we will continue to see the global flow of extremist ideas, of extremists themselves, and of oil (and the huge profits associated with it) into and out of the new caliphate. Also likely to flow freely are arms and other material support for the opponents of this development. All of this points to the continuing reality and importance of globalization even in the face of efforts to create new obstacles to it.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">However, that is not to say, as Thomas Friedman has argued (again erroneously), that globalization is inexorable. There are developments such as a nuclear winter or a pandemic worse than the Spanish flu that could slow or alter the nature of globalization, although it is worth noting that both of those developments would, themselves, be global in scope.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Contemporary globalization is defined by the great liquidity of its many elements (money, social networks, people) as well as the barriers (tariffs; national borders; China’s “Great Firewall”; visas; terrorist watch-lists) that are often erected to stem the flows that at least some see as undesirable. The idea of barriers would seem to suggest that globalization could be ended if only there were enough of them and that they were made impermeable.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">However, there are never enough barriers and those that exist have proven to be porous (e.g., firewalls on computers housing government secrets or valuable corporate information). Therefore, it is best to think of globalization as involving a continuing dialectic between global flows and the barriers erected to impede them.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Flows of, for example, capital, immigrants, ideas, and pollution will tend to continue, even accelerate, until they reach a point where they engender strong enough opposition to begin to erect barriers to them. These efforts might be successful for a time, but it is likely that whatever barriers are created will eventually be swamped by global flows and/or dismantled by those with vested interests opposed to the barriers.</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Because of the dialectic between global flows and barriers, globalization varies in terms of a number of dimensions. Globalization can vary in its extensiveness; its elements need not cover the entire globe (indeed nothing does) to be considered an aspect of globalization. McDonald’s is a global phenomenon even though its restaurants are now found in “only” about half the world.&nbsp;</span>Some areas of the world will escape the ravages of climate change and perhaps even benefit from it.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Intensiveness of globalization can vary everywhere from the currently “hot” spread of radical Islam to the “cool” movement of a global fashion change. In terms of velocity, some global changes occur seemingly overnight (the flow of radical new ideas and social movements) while others (the movement toward greater global economic equality) are glacial.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Finally, there is the variation in the impact of global processes from high (the 9/11 attacks) to low (the latest fad in emoticons on the internet).</span></div><div style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: 0px; line-height: 21px; margin-bottom: 15px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Nothing is inevitable in the socio-economic world, and that is true for both globalization and the barriers erected to stem its many different flows. Both globalization and those barriers are social constructions, and they are constantly open to change, reconstruction, or deconstruction.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">It is safe to say that the future will bring with it a continuation of this dialectic, although the way it plays out will vary greatly from one locale to another and over time. That’s not much of a generalization, but it’s the best we can do in the case of globalization.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">By Jennifer Birich</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Political Commentator</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Photo-credit:&nbsp;</span></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-2185861708257281802017-02-23T15:40:00.000+01:002017-02-23T15:40:16.023+01:00SOMALIA: The New President's Challenges<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">The inauguration of a new president in Somalia &nbsp;has given rise to greater optimism about the country's prospects than at any other time in the past two decades. Somalia's new President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed inaugural ceremony took place yesterday in the highly secured airport, in the presence of several regional leaders.<br /><br />The election of Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed, a former prime minister (2010-2011), sparked elation in a country desperate for an end to decades of conflict and anarchy. But he warned the country that there would be no quick fixes.<br /><br />Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed's biggest challenge, would be reconciling Somali different clans, improving law and order, justice system, and rebuilding the army, capable of replacing the African Union, AMISOM peacekeeping force, which plans to withdraw in 2018.<br /><br />Somalia has not had an effective central government since the collapse of Siad Barre's military regime in 1991, which led to decades of civil war and lawlessness fuelled by clan conflicts. The terrorist group ''Shabab'' was forced out the capital by African Union troops in 2011 but the jihadists still control parts of the countryside and carry out attacks against government, military and civilian targets in Mogadishu.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tb7CoW4qOMI/WK7xD4BiZlI/AAAAAAAADeE/D-tYmgZo1wkchFaL_yBS0LT5skaQx5l4QCLcB/s1600/farmajo.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="180" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-tb7CoW4qOMI/WK7xD4BiZlI/AAAAAAAADeE/D-tYmgZo1wkchFaL_yBS0LT5skaQx5l4QCLcB/s320/farmajo.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />Somalia is never free from violent attacks. The country has been devastated by more than two decades of civil war and foreign interventions. One million people have been internally displaced and more than a million have sought refuge in neighbouring countries.<br /><br />According to UN report, more than 300,000 people died in the famine of 2011-12, half of them children under five. This was even more than the number that perished in the famine of 1992. More than 6 million are in need of life-saving assistance. While the region suffered one of the worst droughts in over 50 years in the whole of Africa, Oxfam attributed the deaths to “catastrophic political failure.”<br /><br />Britain, as the former colonial power in Kenya, Uganda, Sudan and breakaway Somaliland, has played a major role in Somalia due to its desire to secure its share of the region’s natural resources. London has been pushing Somalia to accept autonomy for about half a dozen of Somalia’s fiefdoms, each with different regional backing. This would be in addition to the breakaway states of Somaliland and Puntland that are not internationally recognized, and would cantonize the country.<br /><br />The US has recognised the new government. The IMF is expected to follow suit but since Somalia owes the Fund more than $352 million this will not bring new funding. The UN is also expected to lift its arms embargo, its oldest international arms blockade, sanctioning the supply of small arms to the new government. Britain has just reopened its embassy in Mogadishu, the first EU country to do so.<br /><br />The turn by the major and regional powers to Somalia is made in an effort to counter the influence of their rivals, most notably China. Somalia has a more than 1,000-mile long coastline opposite Yemen on the Bab al-Mandab Strait, through which 23,000 ships transit every year carrying nearly $1 trillion worth of trade, most crucially oil, to and from Europe.<br /><br />In addition to its own potential oil resources, Somalia’s strategic position places it at the heart of a projected pipeline network to bring oil from South Sudan to the soon-to-be expanded Kenyan port of Lamu, south of the border with Somalia. Another pipeline would link it to an oil refinery in Kampala, Uganda, which has recently started producing oil. A further pipeline will link the Kenyan capital Nairobi with Ethiopia’s capital Addis Ababa, providing Ethiopia with another export route for oil from the Ogaden region bordering Somalia.<br /><br />For the foreseeable future, the state will be wholly dependent on military support and intervention provided by external parties- for some whom the paramount concern is their own national security interest. While this should not preclude ambition, and may hope that Somalia can assume responsibility for maintaining internal peace sooner than is commonly envisaged; It also a reminder of prevailing realities.<br /><br />Immensely patient, even-handed negotiation and a consensual approach will be required if a new Somali State is to emerge and meld. Tactless diplomacy and interventions by foreign governments and UN agencies, of which there have been a number, need to be kept to minimum. The new Mogadishu government is in no position to consolidate power; It will be facing a battle for survival.<br /><br />The new president has little concrete to say about how it was going to alleviate the dreadful poverty and social problems the country faces. Any progress in improving the lot of an embattled populace, it is&nbsp;self-evidently welcome and encouraging, but believing in ''quick fix'' would be a wishful thinking.<br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br />African Affairs Expert<br /><br />Photo Credit: AFP photo of Somali President: Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed</div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-75671309741658564122017-02-22T15:13:00.003+01:002017-02-22T15:13:35.696+01:00HOLLAND: Geert Wilders' Surge<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Netherlands' general election, on March 15, is widely seen as a test of whether the anti-elite sentiment that underpinned Brexit and Donald Trump's victory will now dislodge centrist parties in continental Europe.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Geert Wilders, the Dutch anti-Islam politician launched his campaign to lead Netherlands, last week.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">His party for Freedom has slim lead in the polls, just ahead of Prime Minister Mark Rutte's Liberal Party.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Geert Wilders has been campaigning on anti-immigration platform for more than a decade but his support has surged in the wake of the refugees crisis.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Gert Wilders plans to close all mosques, shut down the asylum system and ban headscarves at public functions have proved popular white working class. He also&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">called for a referendum on the Netherlands membership in the European Union after Britain voted to leave the 28 member bloc.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">There is little realistic prospect that Mr Wilders will become prime minister. Although polls put his party in the lead, it is only expected to win up to 27 seats in the parliament, far short of the 76 seats needed to form a government. Others parties have emphatically refused to form a coalition with Mr Wilders, raising the prospect that the leader of the largest party in parliament could be prevented from running the country for the first time since 1977.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vZJNZNKt1UE/WK2bETnDa-I/AAAAAAAADdU/_cSoIr-KezMetgvqBpqsco6amnH5OU8ygCLcB/s1600/download.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-vZJNZNKt1UE/WK2bETnDa-I/AAAAAAAADdU/_cSoIr-KezMetgvqBpqsco6amnH5OU8ygCLcB/s320/download.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Immigration has long been a political issue in Netherlands. Far-Right politicians have exploited concerns about the families of ''guest workers'' from Turkey and Morocco who settled in the country from the 1960s. And</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">, political engagement has tempered racism and anti-migration sentiments. But it has done so at a cost.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">In 2006, at the height of European “Islamophobia”, rhetoric and the aftershock of Theo van Gogh’s assassination by a radical Muslim still rung through Dutch politics. Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party (</span><span class="caps" style="border: 0px; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">PVV</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">) was elected into parliament with 9 out of 150 seats. Eight years later, after making the anti-Islam movie “Fitna”, proposing a tax on hijabs and being party to a right-wing “mainstream” government that passed a law banning burqas, the Freedom Party is larger than ever.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The rise of Dutch populism and political racism has two roots. The first is the botched integration of migrant workers: facing a shortage in the labor needed to rebuild the country after the Second World War, the Dutch government tried to attract temporary workers. The government pursued a policy of implicit segregation. A large group of migrants were able to stay, but did not speak sufficient Dutch, were often housed poorly and had little access to education, resulting in expansive social and integration problems.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The second root lies in the Dutch political response to political movements expressing their concern about issues of integration. In the late 1980s, the extreme-right Center Party received a seat in Parliament. Its leader, Hans Janmaat, coined the phrase “full is full” and called for the assimilation of non-Western migrants. This created a political climate in which discussing problematic aspects of migration became a cultural taboo and was conflated with racism. As a result, there was no room for “moderate” debate on these problems: racist rhetoric was met with silence and denial of the issue from the center left.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Those two developments led to the election of Pim Fortuyn in 2002 and Geert Wilders in 2006, both of whom mixed an ideology of anti-migration and Islamophobia with anti-establishment sentiments. People who felt disenfranchised by the “political elite” flocked to extreme-right politics. Every call for a&nbsp;</span><span style="border: 0px; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">“cordon sanitaire”</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;of Wilders caused a surge in the polls as he dominated media headlines with tirades against Islam and survived a hate speech trial.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">It seemed a winning strategy until he took it one step too far and got an audience of followers&nbsp;</span>to shout “we want less Moroccans”<span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">. This incited a mass movement of protests and thousands of reports of hate speech to the police. As a result, he suddenly plunged in the polls and witnessed various elected Freedom Party officials leaving his party.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Constant engagement of other parties with the&nbsp;</span><span class="caps" style="border: 0px; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">PVV</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;has defeated Islamophobia. The liberal D66 constantly challenged racism and defended equal treatment. Labour (PvdA) promoted migrant MPs through its ranks to offer their communities a platform, and MP Ahmed Marcouch dispelled the myth that Moroccans are more likely to be criminal due to the Moroccan “princeling” culture.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">This engagement, however, has also had drawbacks. It has, to some extent, made racist concessions part of the accepted political discourse and government policies: the&nbsp;</span><span class="caps" style="border: 0px; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">PVV</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">-backed Rutte government has imposed tougher sanctions on crime, it has created less room for labor migration and asylum seekers. As a result, what was considered racist and politically extreme in 2002 has now also become part of the political mainstream.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The second drawback is even larger. Due to the overblown nature of the racism debate in the Netherlands, the Dutch have lost their capacity to notice and rally against the more subliminal power structures allow everyday racism to happen. While the entire country condemned a company for not hiring an intern in 2013 because of his race, three million people signed an online petition that embraced the racist blackface symbol of&nbsp;</span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zwarte_Piet" style="border: 0px; color: #1c2026; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank">Zwarte Piet</a><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">, because they had grown “tired” of discussions on racism.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Overt, overblown racism and Islamophobia have been defeated and are no longer influential forms of thought in the Netherlands. But as a consequence, an acceptance of racist attitudes is codified into large parts of society.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">This is the trade-off that people need to keep in mind if they want to take something away from the recent successes that anti-racist campaigning has had in the Netherlands.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Political Analyst/Author</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Photo-Credit: AFP-photo of Dutch Politician Geert Wilders</span></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-40873883350665388402017-02-20T13:27:00.000+01:002017-02-20T13:27:01.323+01:00WORLD: The Concept of : ''Fake News''<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Authoritarian and democratic regimes create a facade of democracy to maintain a veneer of legitimacy: By constructing fake political parties and phony social movements, as well as pseudo news media as outlet of ''Fake News'', they</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;simulate democratic institutions to prevent authentic democracy from ever taking root.</span><br /><div id="U9001583394782AeG"><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Over time, these regimes have taken their imitation to a new level. With the principal goal of keeping their grip on power or manipulate the masses, modern authoritarian and democratic governments have built a sophisticated alternate universe of institutions: faux news outlets with state-of-the-art production values.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''Fake news'' are&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">fabricated content or </span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">fictitious articles</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;designed to deceive readers</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;with the goal of profiting through clickbait.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Fake News deliberately publish hoaxes, propaganda, and disinformation purporting to be real news--often using social media to drive web traffic and amplify their effect.&nbsp;</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-i-M6YGL_3Ws/WKrgF9Tb_ZI/AAAAAAAADdE/63fp7f57sVAMzv8LOfTqUljksNmwXHciACLcB/s1600/th%2B%25281%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-i-M6YGL_3Ws/WKrgF9Tb_ZI/AAAAAAAADdE/63fp7f57sVAMzv8LOfTqUljksNmwXHciACLcB/s1600/th%2B%25281%2529.jpg" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Prior to the 2016 US election, ''</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Fake News'' maintained a presence on the Internet and tabloid journalism and</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;had not impacted the election. Subsequent to the 2016 election, the issue of fake news turned into a political weapon, with Hillary Clinton's supporters accusing&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump's administration statements to be ''Fake News'' and Donald Trump's supporters claiming that Hillary Clinton's supporters&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">spread false news. &nbsp;Due to these back and forth complaints, the definition of fake news as used for such polemics became vague.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump, who has taken heat for making demonstrably false statements as president, has become an enthusiastic user of the term, bestowing the designation ''fake''or ''fake news'' on targets that include CNN, the media as a whole and the entire nation of Russia.</span><br /><span style="color: #252525; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="color: #252525; font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The best-known enterprise of ''Fake News'' is Russia’s RT (formerly Russia Today). During the referendum in Crimea, a hodgepodge of radical political figures, uncredentialed for authentic election monitoring, appeared on Russian government media outlets to present findings that went lock step with those of the Kremlin. In this brave new world, ''Fake News' are spread to the world from a simulated news outlet.</span></div><div id="U9001583394782RO"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Not long ago, many observers were dismissive of RT’s influence. Today, however, thoughtful analysts are not as cavalier. While it is admittedly difficult to offer a precise metric of influence, RT and other Russian government media have become intertwined with the world of normal news, especially online. Key narratives pushed by such Russian media are picked up and propagated by Western news outlets.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Popular aggregators of information on Russia, such as Johnson’s Russia List, seamlessly include RT and other Kremlin-backed media alongside sources such as the Associated Press and the German broadcaster Deutsche Welle. Slick Web sites with phony, misleading news reports appear increasingly in the new democracies of Central Europe to offer a Kremlin spin on events. As China, Iran and other ambitious, undemocratic regimes scale up their global media activities, the challenge of distinguishing between authentic and phony information will become only more complicated.</span></div><div id="U9001583394782C8G"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Why are the authoritarians going global with their simulation of democracy?</span></div><div></div><div id="U9001583394782DTB"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">First, in today’s helter-skelter, fragmented world of media, these regimes appreciate that it is much easier to cloud the understanding of important issues. Masters of deception at home, they are investing heavily abroad and exploiting the opportunities offered by the new media environment to sow confusion and distrust.</span></div><div id="U9001583394782HTD"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">More ominously, they seek to undermine democracy and human rights institutions from within. As the authoritarian alternate universe crashes into the democratic space, the imitation affects the real thing. At the Cold War’s end, this unpleasant reality did not factor into assumptions about how the world would operate. We must rethink these assumptions quickly, however, if the post-Cold War order is to be salvaged.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">''Fake News'' concept is also well played by the so called ''democratic states''. In this battle of heart and minds to win the popular support of its citizens, democratic states governments use corporate media and spin doctors. The West/American corporate media and governments spin doctors have done their utmost to propagate and sustain an image of West/America as guarantor of freedom, and in turn the majority of Europeans and Americans have embraced this comfortable, mythic view as their own.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Democratic states governments and corporate media have encouraged the masses to engage in faulty thinking, in an effort to gain public support for self serving agendas that typically cannot be justified rationally; the only way to get them through is by sophistical means.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">It is important to note that the primary motivation of gigantic media conglomerates is amassing profit, not truth. As a general rule, only if truth pays, will they report it. Likewise, a government seeking power and control over its citizens (which is all governments do to one extent or another) is likely to censor and whitewash the information it provides to its citizens, and even worse, to propagate disinformation, especially when the facts get in the way of implementing its own agenda.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">So it would be naive to expect a government in ''democratic states'' that seeks power and control over its citizens not to use its influence over the corporate media in order to spread self-serving propaganda. As much as the corporate media need democratic states government to maximize their bottom line--through tax breaks, military contracts, relaxed media ownership rules, access to its officials and spokespersons, as well as other incentives and kickbacks--governments in democratic states have incredible power and leverage over the corporate media. </span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">For example, the latter was the case in the lead-up to Iraq War when the George W Bush's administration attempted to make the facts fit the policy, in order to justify the war.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Democracy depends on an informed populace. Regrettably, the practice of ''Fake News'' has made the people victims of the politico-corporate establishment in democratic and authoritarian states. And the people allow themselves to be duped and manipulated.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">As W. K. Clifford remarked in his famous essay of 1877:&nbsp;<i>''The Ethics of Belief:</i>&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">''it is wrong in all cases to believe on insufficient evidence; and where its presumption to doubt and to investigate, there is worse than presumption to believe.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">In fact, Clifford maintained that each and every one of us (and not just politicians, lawyers, religious leaders, journalists, and others who bears a fiduciary relationship to us) has a duty to question, think before we commit them to belief. '' it is not the leader of men, statesmen, philosopher, or poet that owes the bounden duty to mankind'' states Clifford. ''No simplicity of mind, no obscurity of station, can escape the universal duty of questioning all that we believe''.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">However, this assumes that the people must be able, in the first place, to distinguish fact from fiction, and sufficient evidence from pseudo evidence. They must have a sense of what constitutes rational criteria for belief before they can even begin to determine if they have a good reason to commit something to belief. But this is possible only if they are privy to the sophistical mechanisms that democratic and authoritarian states/governments, through politico-corporate media establishment, use to manipulate and garner their support.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">For example, the Downing Street memos document that, prior to the invasion of Iraq did not truly believe that Saddam Hussein posed a serious threat to national security. Nevertheless, the Bush's administration sought public support for invading Iraq and rightly believed that, the people were feeling insecure enough after the September 11, 2001, to support the invasion if they were told it was necessary to prevent another terror attack. So the Bush's administration used their vulnerability to manipulate their support. Unfortunately, the people based their commitment to Bush's war on faulty thinking. This same destructive pattern has repeated itself ad nauseam.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">A single article cannot cover all the rational thought processes that can help to promote true democracy and protect ourselves against '' Fake News'' practices. Nevertheless, there are six steps that are crucial to thinking for ourselves in order to defend the true democratic values against ''Fake News'' tactics (human gullibility and unreasoning):&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">1. Ask for explanations, 2. Look for consistency, 3. Question the status quo, 4. Believe only credible authorities, 5. Watch out for fear mongering and demagoguery, 6. Beware of media supported stereotypes.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Taken together, these instructions provide a useful heuristic for determining whether you are justified in accepting any politico-corporate claims.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif; line-height: 24px;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Political Analys</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Photo-Credit: AFP-photo:&nbsp;</span></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-39056716802785004382017-02-17T13:44:00.000+01:002017-02-17T13:44:03.504+01:00U.S.: America's Inertia<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on">In the seat of American power, power spends most of its time on its seat. That's because, as Henry Kissinger once observed, the greatest force at work in America's capital is inertia. It handily trumps partisanship and also leaves the more positive drivers of action that one might hope for in a government -- such as leadership, creativity, or moral courage.<br /><br />America spends more money on military then China, Britain, France, Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany, India, Italy, Brazil,South Korea, Australia, Canada, and Turkey combined. This is a total of almost $650 billion with all these countries combined while America spends over $700 billion.<br /><br />Admiral Mike Mullen, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff from October 2007 to September 2011, claims that the greatest threat to America's security is its debt. That the time has come for America to rest its foreign policy and military spending. He believes that America could save up $100 million by slashing programs and budgets for unnecessary programs, cut military spending.<br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-F2tpXSHbMxA/WKbvhucw1gI/AAAAAAAADcw/AvEishe4zVAehOi8XYiSbyQeKZU3417cwCLcB/s1600/th.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-F2tpXSHbMxA/WKbvhucw1gI/AAAAAAAADcw/AvEishe4zVAehOi8XYiSbyQeKZU3417cwCLcB/s1600/th.jpg" /></a></div><br />You might disagree with Admiral Mike Mullen's conclusions about what a right-sized, technologically up-to-date, doctrinally sound military, conceived and prepared to ensure America's safety and worldwide interests, might look like. That's perfectly reasonable. But it is impossible not to conclude that Admiral Mike Mullen's conclusions call to debate what the military should look like and then implement the agreed-upon changes makes sense.<br /><br />It makes economic sense because the United States spends more on defense than all other major powers combined -- even though very nearly all of them are our allies. It makes national security sense because the threats the country faces are changing and because emerging powers are not the slaves to legacy systems that the United States is. It makes political sense because such a reform process is the very essence of good governance and would free up resources for endeavors that could help broader cross-sections of the American population. Yet the one thing that we know about this idea is that it's never going to happen.<br /><br />That is because it would require the kind of far-reaching change that the government is terrible at achieving. It would involve confronting moneyed, entrenched interests in the private sector as well as the Pentagon, which kills ideas that threaten its core programs more efficiently than it does any foreign enemy. This is the military-industrial complex that Dwight Eisenhower warned us about as he prepared to leave office -- except today it is bigger and more powerful than it has ever been.<br /><br />This does not mean, of course, that there are no hugely creative military leaders who have contemplated just the kind of changes that are needed. In Washington, however, strength lies with the opponents rather than the proponents of change. And the opponents possess the ultimate political weapon of mass destruction: They can accuse leaders who want to challenge the status quo of making America weak. So we're left with all the systems the country has accumulated to counter every post-World War II defense challenge: multiple air forces, multiple expeditionary forces, multiple cyber commands.<br /><br />We can't afford what we have. We don't need much of what we have. The country is misallocating resources in precisely the same way as other nations that have historically made themselves vulnerable, both militarily and economically. Yet any positive, proactive change will exist only on the margins until some crisis demands otherwise, while other supposed "innovations" will in fact just maintain things as they are and have always been.<br /><br />Washington's debilitating strain of sleeping sickness affects some parts of the government, too. Indeed, the political system hates action more than nature abhors a vacuum. Both political parties would no doubt agree that the country cannot afford the retirement health-care system it has, even if they have different answers for how to fix the problem.<br /><br />Both parties also have to agree that it is in America's interest to invest in highways and bridges in a meaningful way, which hasn't been done since the Eisenhower era. And both must acknowledge that having half the minority students in inner cities not graduating from high school is a formula for social catastrophe. Yet all these issues remain largely unaddressed.<br /><strike><br /></strike>Even outside government, we have built massive apparatuses designed to assert that some issues are not issues at all, in order to protect the interests of a few. Climate change is one such issue: enormous and indisputable, yet disregarded thanks to political pressure from a well-funded alliance with an affinity for profit and an allergy to science.<br /><br />Inequality rivaling that of the Gilded Age is another issue, as is the country's inability to create jobs for the middle class, because the rich use their influence to prioritize their interests above those of the rest. The U.S. financial system, meanwhile, is corrupt to its core, but its leaders act with impunity -- sometimes with the assistance of members of the government.<br /><br />With each of these issues, the common sense that keeps a child from touching an open flame or playing in traffic would suggest that actions are urgently needed. But they are not and will not be forthcoming. In no small part, this is because we have given a handful of people disproportionate influence over elections. &nbsp;Money becomes speech -- therefore those with more money now have more say in the country's national affairs. We have also institutionalized the right-left, no-compromise polarization of the political system via gerrymandering and Capitol Hill customs. This has undercut reasoned debate and votes that could produce progress.<br /><br />But America's inertia is caused by something else too. Call it superpower smugness. Or just call it complacency. We don't create, or even really demand, genuine change in America because things seem to be working well enough. America is the world's richest and most powerful nation. When we have crises, we recover from them. The country can make catastrophic errors of judgment in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and absorb the costs and collateral damage to its national image.<br /><br />Furthermore, the private sector, for all its self-interested political behavior, is infused with genius and a stunning capacity to reinvent itself. It has compensated time and again for Washington's sloth and willful ignorance.<br /><br />So we have been numbed into believing that black is white, that a failing system is functioning, that we, alone among nations, are invulnerable to our own stupidity. If there were ever a flaw in a strategy for national security, this is surely the most pernicious. The only antidote is a healthy dose of courage to act first with good sense and second with a spirit for reform.<br /><br />By Guylain Gustave Moke<br />International Affairs Expert<br />Political Analyst/Writer<br /><br />Photo-Credit:</div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4044822561624414240.post-607213021096796492017-02-16T15:47:00.001+01:002017-02-16T15:47:25.056+01:00U.S.: Trump & Peace Process in Middle East<div dir="ltr" style="text-align: left;" trbidi="on"><div id="spIntroTeaser"><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The Palestinian President fully supports Donald Trump's call on Israel to pull back on settlement expansion, but is yet to comment on a trending idea that a peace deal might not necessarily include an independent Palestinian state.&nbsp;</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump, on Wednesday, asked the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to temporarily hold off on building new Jewish settlements on land claimed by Palestinians for their future state. &nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">''I would like to see you pull back on settlements for a little bit'' said Trump, instead promising to strike a deal that would bring an end to the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">While the official White House position has changed, Israel, prior to Netanyahu'sa visit to the US, went on to approve some 6,000 new settlement homes since Trump's inauguration. The Israeli parliament has also approved the legalization of nearly 4,000 settler homes in the Area C of the West Bank as it passed a controversial retroactive bill.</span><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iLn0jyt8B80/WKW5ePHTtpI/AAAAAAAADcU/_BSLCcLf0t4Ur2eiBLLET_h0rNDOS1xAQCLcB/s1600/3D4147CE00000578-4228348-image-a-5_1487185492324.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="209" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-iLn0jyt8B80/WKW5ePHTtpI/AAAAAAAADcU/_BSLCcLf0t4Ur2eiBLLET_h0rNDOS1xAQCLcB/s320/3D4147CE00000578-4228348-image-a-5_1487185492324.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">The issue of settlements has been widely publicized in recent months after the Obama's administration abstained from voting on what Tel Aviv called an ''anti-Israel'' UNSC settlement resolution.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump and his team voiced concern over the adoption of the UNSC resolution and sent out messages which indicated that the new administration would not oppose Israeli settlement expansion once in office.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The peace process has been at a standstill for years. Israelis and Palestinians are stuck on the issue of settlements — there are now more than 300,000 Israeli settlers living in the West Bank, and the Palestinians have refused to reopen negotiations unless Israel agrees to a settlement freeze. But&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">The settlement issue is an easy one compared with the difficult problems down the road, such as how to draw the borders of the two proposed states, what to do about Palestinian refugees who have been living in camps outside the country for more than 60 years, and how to share water resources.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump's statement that the United States would no longer insist on an independent Palestinian state as part of a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians is a shift from the long-standing US policy which envisages a two-state solution, and it will&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">destroy the chances for peace and undermining American interests, standing and credibility in the region.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Trump's shift</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">&nbsp;comes at a moment when Palestinians are disillusioned and Palestinian leaders who support a two-state solution are weak, and Israel is not in a mood for cutting deals. And&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump's ''doing nothing foreign policy'' suits Benjamin Netanyahu. The Israeli prime minister is also pleased by the fact that the talks with Trump focused on the one state solution with two systems.</span></div><div id="spArticleColumn" itemscope="itemscope" itemtype="http://schema.org/Article"><div id="spArticleSection"><div><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Under Trump, it will be difficult for professional diplomats to make the case for engagement and diplomacy on Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The larger problem is that the administration views disengagement from the Middle East and a minimalist foreign policy as a good foreign policy.&nbsp;</span></div><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump's ''doing nothing'' foreign policy approach is associated with America's current foreign policy of doing less, winding down wars and not starting new ones. If you are not doing anything, you have fewer headaches and fewer failures as well. But in reality, that does not speak to America's global leadership, nor does it really protect&nbsp;America's vital interests down the road.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Under Trump. hope of two-state solution between Israel and Palestinians fades away because Trump is the epitome of the status quo.&nbsp;</span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Trump believes that the time for a two-state solution has gone.</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">By Guylain Gustave Moke</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">International Affairs Expert</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Political Analyst/Author</span><br /><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: Times, &quot;Times New Roman&quot;, serif;">Photo-Credit: AFP-photo:</span></div></div></div>Gustave Mokehttps://plus.google.com/111760235124718394522noreply@blogger.com0